The appearance of the first armor occurred long before the advent of military affairs, war as such, and therefore soldiers and the army. Stone Age people first learned to make simple armor from animal skins. Armor is often associated with something metallic, but leather and cloth were much more common materials for its manufacture. The skins became the prototype for the first leather and fabric armor. The skin protected the first people during hunting. Of course, such armor could not save from serious wounds, because to give strength to the skin it was necessary to process, and such technologies would appear only millennia later. Yes, and there was no need for combat armor, the guns were then extremely simple, and clashes with their own kind were rare.
Antique armor
The period of the first civilizations marked the beginning of the era of wars between states and the emergence of the army as an organization. People learned to process fabric, metal, and leather, so in this era it became possible to create armor that provided real protection. Leather armor, as well as fabric armor, became the first on the way to a knight in armor. They learned to process metal a long time ago, but truly strong armor appeared only in the late Middle Ages, so fabric and leather remained in the foreground for a long time.
Egyptian armor
Ancient Egypt was not very different in climate from present-day Egypt, which left an imprint on what kind of armor the Egyptians used. Due to the unbearable heat and the relative high cost of making even fabric armor, ordinary soldiers almost never wore armor. They used a shield and wore traditional Egyptian wigs, which were made of hard leather and often had a wooden base. It was a kind of helmet that could soften the blow of the weapon popular at that time - a mace or club. Bronze axes were quite rare weapons, let alone swords. Only people close to the Pharaoh could afford this. The same can be said about armor, even made of fabric and leather. Over many years of excavations, almost not a single metal shell was found, which indicates the high cost of its production and, possibly, low efficiency. The calling card of the Egyptian army, and many armies of that period, were, of course, chariots, so all noble, well-trained warriors fought on chariots. They mainly acted as mobile cavalry and shot from arrows. This kind of action required considerable skill, and therefore the chariot warriors always wore fabric or leather armor, because the loss of such a skillful soldier was not cheap. Not to mention the fact that these were often noble people.
Myth 6. Knights wore armor without taking them off
Do you remember the Dog ever taking off his armor?
A still from the series “Game of Thrones” There is an opinion that putting on knightly armor is very difficult and takes a long time. The process supposedly takes several hours, and the warrior is assisted by several squires. Once they are finished, the knight will be literally locked in armor and will not be able to get rid of it on his own.
This means that the noble chevalier simply will not take off his armor for weeks, or even months, during the campaign. Because of this, naturally, he will stink wildly, and he will have to relieve himself, large and small, directly into his armor.
In the same Game of Thrones, the Hound and Brienne of Tarth carry their cuirasses and chain mail in any scene, never changing clothes.
However, this is fiction. Real combat armor can be donned in 5–7 minutes with the help of a squire. If you don't believe me, look at this video.
You can do it alone in half an hour, because you will have to tinker with the laces. However, there were also armor with a minimum of ties.
The knights and their soldiers had neither the need nor the opportunity to wear armor 24/7 - after all, this is not a space marine suit with a built-in life support system. If you look at the medieval
, you will see that their warriors wear regular dress when they are not fighting.
The armor was quickly put on 1. Medieval Warfare: A History / OUP Oxford 2. P. Contamine. War in the Middle Ages immediately before a battle or parade and was filmed when they were not needed. On the march, knights wore quilted gambesons, which served as both clothing and underarmor. They themselves protected well from weapons, especially from cutting blows. It is much more convenient to cut in a gambeson than to carry 25 kilograms of rattling iron all the time.
Armor of Greece
Ancient Greece can rightfully be considered a kind of birthplace of armor, in the sense in which we know it. Hoplites are Greek heavy infantry. Light infantry were called peltasts. Their names come from the types of shields they used: hoplon and pelta, respectively. A warrior in armor in those days was no less terrible than knights, clad in full armor, racing on a horse. The best armies of the Greek city policies consisted of wealthy citizens, because in order to become a member of the phalanx (a formation of heavily armed infantrymen) you had to buy equipment for yourself, and this cost a lot of money. The main means of protection, of course, was a large round shield - a hoplon, which weighed about 8 kg and protected the body from the neck to the knees. Thanks to this formation, the hoplite, by and large, did not need to protect the body, because the phalanx assumed that the body would always be behind the shield. Despite the fact that in these times bronze processing reached a very high level, bronze armor was not as popular as fabric armor.
Linnothorax - battle armor made of several layers of dense fabric, most often used by hoplites, as well as light infantry and cavalry. The armor did not restrict movement, and was a pleasant relief for the already bronze-clad soldier. The bronze version of the armor was called the hippothorax, and we can often see it in an anatomical version. Just like the bracers and leggings, made as if they tightly fit the soldier’s muscles. Scales never took hold in Greece as the main type of armor, which could not be said about their eastern neighbors.
In addition to the shield, the famous attribute of the Greek hoplite was the helmet. The Corinthian helmet can be considered the most recognizable. This is a fully enclosed helmet with slits for the eyes and mouth, in a T-shape. The helmet was often decorated with horsehair, the decoration reminiscent of a mohawk. In the history of the Greek helmet there were two initial prototypes. The Illyrian helmet had an open face and no nose protection, and it also had cutouts for the ears. The helmet did not provide such protection as the Corinthian one, but it was much more comfortable, not to mention better visibility. Subsequently, the Corinthian helmet evolves into something similar to the Illyrian one, but for most of its history it will remain closed on all sides.
Myth 8. This cool helmet is simply irreplaceable in battle
German stechhelm, around 1500.
Image: Metropolitan Museum of Art / Wikimedia Commons Take a look at this picture. This is stechhelm, or “toad head”. Very powerful protection for the face and neck. The helmet is firmly attached to the cuirass and completely covers the owner’s face, making it virtually invulnerable even to a direct hit from a galloping lance.
In various works of “dark” fantasy, this is exactly the kind of thing that really bad guys carry on their heads, aiming for the post of some Lord of Evil. This headdress adds to the wearer's image, you know.
The “toad head” looks very ominous and menacing. It’s just that it wasn’t used in battles.
This is a tournament helmet worn by SV Grancsay. A Jousting Harness / Philadelphia Museum of Fine Art Bulletin exclusively for equestrian gatherings. The design of the shtehhelm ensures safety, but allows you to look only forward and only by tilting your head. It is acceptable for a knight to gallop along the lists - a track for tournaments with pikes, divided along a barrier so that the riders do not crash into each other.
But in a real battle, the “toad head” will prevent the owner from seeing what is going on on either side of him, and will make him practically helpless. This is sports equipment, not combat equipment.
Roman armor
The Roman army is a kind of continuation and development of the ideas of the phalanx. At this time the Iron Age begins. Battle armor made of bronze and fabric is replaced by iron, the Roman legions adapt to modern materials. The use of a sword in the Bronze Age was ineffective, since it was necessary to get close to the enemy and break the formation. Even excellent Bronze Age swords were very short and weak. The spear was the weapon of the hoplite and many armies of this time. In the Iron Age, the sword became more durable and longer, and there was a need for armor that could effectively stop slashing blows. So the heavy armor of the hoplite is replaced by chain mail - lorica hamata. Chain mail is not very effective against a spear, but can stop a slash from a sword or axe. Legions often fought with tribes that did not have a formation as such; many barbarians from the north were armed with axes, which made chain mail an excellent defense.
With the evolution of blacksmithing comes the evolution of armor. Lorica segmentata - plate armor; Roman warriors could be distinguished among many by this armor. This battle armor replaced chain mail, which over time had become ineffective against Germanic longswords, which had become easy and cheap to make, making them common in tribal armies. Plates fastened in pairs on the chest and pestle pauldrons provided greater protection than chain mail. The last “new thing” of the Roman army, after the birth of Christ, was the lorica sqamata. Scale or lamellar armor was often used by auxiliary troops. The metal plates were fastened with overlapping leather cords or metal rods, making the armor look like scales.
Myth 3. Chainmail did not protect from anything
Battle of Arsuf.
Engraving by Gustav Dore. Image: Public Domain The previous myth goes hand in hand with the next one - supposedly chain mail itself could not really protect against anything. Therefore, medieval knights quickly abandoned it, switching to full plate armor.
In films, warriors wearing only chain mail are, as a rule, extras and commoners who are only capable of dying in the rain of arrows. It is believed that a shirt made of iron rings is a very cheap and simple thing, and if it is good for anything, it is only complete with armor.
In reality, chain mail provided reliable protection from piercing and slashing weapons, and from arrows. For example, at the Battle of Arsuf in 1191, Saladin's archers fired at the crusaders of Richard I the Lionheart.
And what do you think - the knights did not pay any attention to the bows of their opponents.
The Muslim chronicler Baha ad-Din ibn Shaddad described the CWC Oman with horror. A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages, how the crusaders, with dozens of arrows sticking out of their chain mail, continued to fight unharmed. Richard won a decisive victory that day.
Plate armor eventually replaced chain mail, not because the latter was vulnerable. Simply forging cuirasses turned out to be faster than manually pulling out wire, cutting it and making rings, and then weaving them into fabric.
Gladiator armor
In the Roman era, armor was worn not only by soldiers, but also by gladiators - slave warriors fighting in arenas for the entertainment of the public. It is a confirmed fact that women participated in battles, but they have been little studied, so men's armor is better known. The gladiator's armor was unusual and sometimes not very effective, which is logical, because gladiator fights are held for the public, appearance and entertainment were in the first place. Gladiators often used fully enclosed helmets, sometimes with decorations and even a jagged or sharpened comb, to fight against a gladiator with a net. The torso was most often open, but the use of breast plates and cuirasses was not unusual. Very often one could see plastic or chain mail sleeves with or without a shoulder pad; they covered a hand without a shield or a hand without a weapon. Leggings often looked like Greek ones, and were sometimes made of thick fabric. One type of gladiator, of which there were more than a dozen, had plastic armor covering the entire body and a closed helmet.
Myth 5. Good armor must have large shoulder pads
Still from the movie “Warcraft”
Fans of the Warcraft universe are well familiar with this stamp. In modern fantasy, shoulder pads are usually depicted as completely disproportionately huge. And it is completely incomprehensible how the owners wear them, even if they were at least three times muscular orcs.
The dimensions of real “amices,” as this element of armor is also called, were much more modest.
They did not restrict movement at all and allowed E. Oakeshott. European Weapons and Armour: From the Renaissance to the Industrial Revolution is a good way to fence while protecting your shoulders, neck and in some cases your chest.
In real history, S. Turnbull was loved. The Samurai Sourcebook huge shoulder pads are only samurai - the Japanese, as always, have their own atmosphere. But they made their sode from plates flexiblely connected with silk cords. When archery or fencing, they moved back so as not to interfere, and covered their arms only when they were lowered.
Early Middle Ages armor
The fall of the Roman Empire and the migration of peoples mark the beginning of the early Middle Ages - the starting point of the evolution of European armor. At this time, light armor was gaining popularity. In particular, quilted armor is cheap to produce and easy to use. Its weight was, according to various estimates, from 2 to 8 kg, the heaviest among Russian hemp armor, which also covered the legs. Good protection was achieved by stitching up to thirty layers of fabric. Such armor could easily protect against arrows and slashing weapons. This type of armor was used in Europe for almost a thousand years, as well as in Rus', which is not surprising, because excellent armor made of fabric could be compared in terms of protection to chain mail. Armor from the Roman era, specifically lamellar armor, was also popular during this time. It was easy to manufacture and provided the proper level of protection.
A more advanced version of fabric armor had metal plates of varying sizes sewn into or on top of the armor. This type of armor is found mainly among wealthier soldiers.
Helmets in this era were mostly similar to metal caps, sometimes with some kind of protection for the nose or face, but most only protected the head. In the post-Roman era, a fairly rapid transition to chain mail began. Germanic and Slavic tribes begin to wear chain mail over clothing or padded armor. In that era, weapons and military strategy assumed close combat, rarely in an organized formation, so such protection was extremely reliable, because the weak point of chain mail was precisely its resistance to a spear. The helmets begin to “grow”, covering the face more and more. They begin to put chain mail on the head, sometimes even without a helmet. The length of the chain mail on the body also increases. Now the battle armor looks like a chain mail coat. A cavalryman's armor often included chain mail protection for the legs.
Subsequently, for almost 600 years, the armor did not change, only the length of the chain mail increased, which in the 13th century became almost a second skin and covered the entire body. However, the quality of chain mail during this period, although superior to early chain mail, still lagged behind the quality of weapons. Chain mail was extremely vulnerable to spears, arrows with a special tip, blows from maces and similar weapons, and even heavy swords could cause fatal injury to a warrior. And what can we say about crossbow bolts, which pierced chain mail like paper, and were extremely common in European armies. In this regard, it was only a matter of time before armor appeared that could solve these problems. Since the end of the 13th century, plate armor has become widespread in Europe - the crown of blacksmithing of the Middle Ages, the most durable armor in the world. The armor was made of steel sheets, and they first covered the body, and after a short time the arms and legs, and then completely encased the warrior in steel. Only a few points remained open so that it was possible to move at all, but they also subsequently began to close. This was the golden age of heavy cavalry, the sight of which caused panic among the infantry. The legendary armor of the knights, made with high quality, was practically impenetrable to the weapons of the militia. It happened that a knight, knocked off his horse during an attack, simply could not be finished off. Of course, such a set of armor could cost more than a small village with an estate, and was available only to the aristocracy and the knightly class.
Steel arms
As a rule, when it comes to knights, people imagine a mounted man in armor with a spear or sword. However, in battle, knights used many more types of weapons than you might think - depending on the battle on horseback or on foot, on whether the enemy was wearing armor or not, the weapons were also different. One of the duties of a squire in battle was to provide the knight with a spare weapon, depending on the changing type of battle or to replace the lost one. Considering that the knight was accompanied on his campaign by up to three squires, one can only imagine what kind of arsenal such a warrior could have in reserve.
Carolingian sword or "Viking sword"
The Carolingian sword gained wide popularity in the early Middle Ages and is presumably a development of ancient spatha (Sparta?). Due to the characteristics of the handles, they were intended mainly for foot combat and were poorly suited for combat with opponents who had armor or chain mail.
The total length of the Caroling was about 1 m, of which the double-edged blade occupied 70-90 cm, the weight of the blade was approximately 1.5 kg.
A special niche was occupied by the Swords of Ulfbert - high-quality swords of the 9th-11th centuries. The steel of the blades was distinguished by its high carbon content and the hardness of the blade edge. Another distinctive feature was the mark of the sword maker - VLFBERHT, from which they took their name.
Romanesque sword
The Romanesque sword is a weapon of the High and early Late Middle Ages, a development of the Carolingian sword. In Europe, it was used exclusively by the nobility, since the carrying of weapons by commoners was already prohibited. Unlike the Carolingians, the redesigned hilt and the center of gravity shifted closer to the hilt made it possible to more productively use this medieval weapon in equestrian combat, and the Romanesque sword also had significantly higher strike accuracy.
In this era, the sword played more of a supporting role, since it was intended to deliver slashing blows, and opponents were already quite often wearing chain mail armor, which sharply reduced the effectiveness of such weapons.
Romanesque swords can be divided into two groups:
- One-handed - blade length 70-90 cm, weight 1-1.3 kg.
- One-and-a-half-handed - blade length 90-110 cm, weight 1.5-2.3 kg.
One-handed swords were used by knights paired with a shield, while one-and-a-half-handed swords made it possible to take the weapon with both hands to enhance the blow.
Gothic swords
The Gothic sword became the most common as a knightly weapon in the late Middle Ages with the transition of armor from chain mail to plate. If before this preference was given to slashing blows, they were replaced by piercing blows, which made it possible to hit the enemy in the joints of the armor. Its distinctive feature was the elongated piercing tip of the blade.
Gothic swords were also divided into two groups:
- One-handed – blade length 70-90 cm
- One-and-a-half and two-handed – blade length 90-110 cm
Estoc
Another weapon designed to penetrate weak spots in armor was the estok - a narrow long sword with a tetrahedral blade. Usually used in mounted combat, in case of loss or breakage of a pike.
Two-handed swords
With the improvement of armor, knights had the opportunity to move away from the need to use a shield in battle and replenish their arsenal with two-handed swords. The advantages of such a weapon were the power of the chopping blow and, of course, the length. Two-handed swords became widespread in the 14th century.
The length of such a sword could reach 1.8 meters and weigh more than 3 kg. Although the bulk of such weapons did not have such terrifying characteristics and on average the length was about 1.5 m and weighed 2-3 kg.
Falchion
One of the types of sword was the falchion. Its distinctive feature was the one-sided sharpening of the blade, as well as its convenience when delivering chopping blows. It became most widespread during the High Middle Ages.
A spear
The spear, as a type of medieval weapon, was mostly used for the initial blow in a collision with an enemy. In the battle with spears, the advantage was primarily due to the length of this type of weapon, so their length increased over time and reached 4.4 m with a weight of 4 kg or more.
Since the speed of approach of mounted warriors was quite high and, in the event of a collision, the recoil from a spear strike could injure a knight, spears were made of brittle wood, which protected the warrior from breaking his arm. Due to its bulkiness, even a spear that was not broken in the first clash was usually discarded by the knights and the battle continued with a weapon more convenient for close combat.
Since the 14th century, spears began to be made in the form of a hollow tube, which lightened their weight and made it easier to break them in a collision, and they also acquired a conical shield to protect the hand.
Battle ax
First of all, the battle ax was simple and cheap to manufacture, which gave it wide distribution throughout the world. Although, unlike the sword, battle axes are not so often associated with heavily armed cavalry, they were a fairly frequently used auxiliary weapon.
The main advantage of the ax is the great power of the chopping blow, which copes well with chain mail, however, with the development of plate armor, axes lost their relevance, giving way to more effective weapons.
One of the later improvements to the battle ax was the addition of a sharp spike on the butt, which made it possible to pierce helmets and plate armor.
Mace
As a knightly weapon, the mace became most widespread in the late Middle Ages. The mace was a metal pommel mounted on a wooden handle 50-80 cm long.
The development of the simple mace in the 13th century was the morningstern, a metal ball equipped with spikes. It could be either mounted on a wooden handle or used as a flail (a ball connected to the handle by a chain).
Hammer
In the late Middle Ages, with the spread of armor, the need arose for knightly weapons that could effectively counteract a heavily armored warrior. One of these solutions was the war hammer, which was a metal pommel on a wooden handle (in some cases the hammer could be all-metal). There were many different variations of this knightly medieval weapon, the most common of which was a pommel in the form of a hammer on one side and a beak on the other. The beak was an elongated spike capable of piercing armor.
The hammer has become a fairly versatile weapon, capable of delivering crushing and piercing blows. Often, to increase combat capabilities, a sharp spike was added to the hammer to allow piercing blows.
Polex
In the late Middle Ages, the polex was invented - a universal pole weapon. Depending on the design, it combined elements of a war hammer or an ax, or combined them. Polex was mainly intended for foot combat.
The length of the shaft ranged from 150 to 210 cm and ended in a pommel with a sharp spike. Also on the top were a hammer and an ax, or a curved beak. Metal plates were often located along the shaft to protect the shaft from being cut. The main difference from the halberd was that the “head” of the poleax was not all metal, but was fastened with bolts or pins.
In addition to combat operations, polex was often used in tournament battles.
Dagger
Despite the rather formidable weapons discussed above, almost every knight had a dagger in his arsenal. In close combat, a short blade is much faster to draw from its sheath than a bulky weapon.
In the Middle Ages, the dagger was a blade 20-40 cm long, and, like swords, it underwent some changes during its existence.
The first daggers looked like a smaller copy of a sword - double-edged, with a fairly thin blade.
However, over time, it became necessary to give them strength and penetrating force sufficient to inflict a wound through armor. This is how triangular daggers designed for stabbing appeared.
Sunset of Armor
Heavy European medieval armor is becoming a relic of history with the widespread introduction of firearms and artillery. The first samples of firearms were extremely unreliable, the effectiveness was tens of meters, they had to be reloaded before the second coming, so heavy armor did not immediately leave the stage of the theater of war. However, already in the Renaissance, plate armor could only be seen at ceremonies and coronations. Plate armor is replaced by a cuirass. The new design of the chest armor allowed bullets and long pikes to ricochet off the armor; for this purpose, a so-called rib was created on the cuirass, in fact, the armor seemed to stretch forward and create an angle, which was supposed to contribute to the chance of a ricochet. With the advent of more modern types of guns at the end of the 17th century, the cuirass finally lost its meaning.
Also, the 18th century was marked by the transition to regular armies, which were maintained by states. Since armor at a reasonable price was not adequate, it was abandoned altogether. However, the need for heavy cavalry did not go away, and good quality cuirasses still provided acceptable protection. Now only cavalrymen - cuirassiers, heavy cavalry of the new generation - wear combat armor on the battlefield. Their armor made it possible to feel calm at a distance of 100 meters from the enemy army, which could not be said about ordinary infantrymen, who began to “crumble” already at a distance of 150-160 meters. Further changes in weapons and military doctrine finally put the armor out of action. Warriors of modern times already walked without using armor.
Iron clothing of Roman soldiers
Thanks to its correct organization, military training and excellent equipment, the Roman army created the impression of irresistible power in the eyes of the enemy. All soldiers on the battlefield wore a shield, helmet and armor that protected them from any throwing, piercing or slashing weapons of the enemy. The armor instilled in the soldiers a sense of their own invulnerability on the battlefield and thereby encouraged them to take more courageous and active actions. The most famous type of armor was the Lorica segmentata. Let's try to figure out what this plate armor looked like, based on images of Trajan's Column and archaeological finds.
Terminology
The term lorica, widely known today, comes from Latin and in the most general sense refers to protective armor - regardless of its design or method of wearing. The Roman antiquarian and grammarian Marcus Terrentius Varro, explaining the origin and meaning of this term, derives the word lorica from lorum - “belt”. He comes to this conclusion
«because it was made from leather straps to protect the chest. After the Gallic armor was introduced into use, the shirt made of iron rings also became known as
».
Bronze figurine of a 2nd century Roman soldier wearing a lorica segmentata. British Museum, London.
As can be seen from this explanation, by lorica Varro primarily understands chain mail. In this regard, he is echoed by another grammarian, Isidore of Seville:
«Armor
(
lorica
)
is so called because it does not have a belt (lorum) and consists only of iron rings interlocked with one another
.”
From other sources there are descriptions of lorica made of plates (lamina) or scales (squama) fitted to each other, which were worn by both the Romans themselves or their allies, and their opponents. Tacitus contrasts the heavy plate armor of the Sarmatians, “which all their leaders and nobles wear,” with the light, non-restricting chain mail (lorica) of the Romans. Finally, references to statues of emperors dressed in armor (statua loricata), judging by the appearance of these statues, imply in this case all-metal armor.
Since Roman sources rarely distinguished between specific types of armor, modern weapons terminology is somewhat artificial and mainly goes back to university Latin of the 17th–18th centuries. Based on the method of armoring and the shape of the armor elements, they distinguish between chain mail (lorica hamata), scaly armor (lorica squamata), lamellar armor (lorica lamelata), as well as plate segmented armor (lorica segmentata), which will be discussed further.
Like the other names listed above, the term lorica segmentata is a modern neologism - it is not found in ancient sources. We don’t have the slightest idea about what the Romans themselves called this armor and whether they called it anything at all. Nevertheless, today the term lorica segmentata has a certain tradition of use; it is accepted not only in the academic environment, but also among numerous reenactors who reproduce the appearance of the Roman army of the imperial time. Therefore, despite all its conventions, we will also use this term in the future for lack of a better one.
Roman legionnaires on Trajan's Column
For the past 300 years, the lorica was the most recognizable armor of the Roman army. It owes its fame primarily to the images on Trajan's Column, erected in 112 in Rome to commemorate the victory over Dacia. The relief frieze of the Column depicts the history of the Dacian War and includes almost 2,000 human figures representing Roman soldiers, their allies, as well as sailors, baggage servants and barbarians. Roman legionaries (622 figures) are shown uniformly wearing loricas, while auxiliary cohort soldiers (461 figures) and horsemen (82 figures) typically wear chain mail or scale armor.
This uneven distribution of weapons gave rise to a wide variety of speculations in literature, which penetrated into painting and cinema. Here, in turn, new myths arose that continue to have a negative impact on popular culture. For example, the creators of the epic Gladiator (1999), despite the very conventional realism of the weapons and armor shown on the screen, still tried to maintain this distinction between legionnaires and auxiliaries: the former are all depicted wearing loricas, and the latter are shown wearing chain mail.
Relief fragment of Trajan's Column depicting Roman legionnaires in heavy armor.
Researchers who have specifically studied this issue invariably emphasize that the images on the reliefs of the Column are a work of art, the content of which was primarily determined by the canons of the genre. The degree of uniformity of military equipment that we see on this monument is an artistic convention. In fact, the equipment of the soldiers of the Roman army at this time was very diverse. For example, on the reliefs of a monument contemporary to Colonna - the monumental Trophy of Trajan from Adamklissi - Roman legionnaires mostly wear chain mail and scale armor, rather than lorica. We see the same variability of military equipment on the reliefs of the Antoninus Column, erected in Rome between 176 and 192 in honor of the victories won by Emperor Marcus Aurelius during the Marcomannic War of 166–180. Finally, the remains of plates and fastening elements of the lorica are found in considerable numbers during excavations of fortifications occupied by soldiers of auxiliary detachments. These finds indicate that auxiliaries who served in the Roman army wore lorica in the same way that legionaries wore chain mail and scale armor.
Fragment of the pedestal of the Column of Antoninus Pius in Rome, depicting the scene of the imperial apotheosis. The Praetorians are dressed in plate armor, very similar in appearance to that worn by the figurine of a soldier from the British Museum. Unlike archaeological finds, in which the chest section is represented by a single plate, here it consists of several parts.
First reconstructions
At the end of the 15th century, the first drawings of individual scenes of the relief frieze of Trajan's Column appeared, and in 1576 Francesco Villamena published a set of 130 engravings that reproduced it in its entirety. These engravings laid the foundation for further depictions of Roman soldiers in book illustrations or artistic canvases of the 17th–19th centuries, which represented scenes from the Holy Scriptures or scenes from the ancient history that was becoming fashionable. The artists who created them usually had a very vague idea of the structure of the armor and were more concerned with reproducing its external form. Most images of the time depict Roman armor as consisting of several rows of horizontal plates that encircled the warrior's body and vertical plates that ran over the shoulders.
The question of how the armor was actually constructed and how the plates were connected to each other first arose among museum workers, who in the last quarter of the 19th century began to decorate exhibitions with life-size mannequins of warriors. In order to put “Roman armor” on a mannequin, it first had to be made, and this raised purely technical questions for specialists about its structure.
Edward Poynter's painting "Loyal to Death" (1865) gives a good idea of how Roman armor was represented by mid-19th century artists. commons.wikimedia.org
One of the first attempts at this kind of reconstruction was made by retired Württemberg army lieutenant Karl Gimbel. He devoted many years to making mannequins dressed in the armor of warriors, from the era of antiquity to the late Middle Ages. Based on the results of his work, in 1902 he published an entire album of photographs, in which a Roman legionnaire in plate armor occupied an honorable place. The main source for Gimbel, as for his predecessors, were images from Trajan’s Column, which he supplemented with a number of archaeological finds known by that time. The author of the reconstruction believed that the metal plates were sewn onto a leather base, which had the shape of a vest. The armor consisted of two side sections, connected at the back using hinges. The warrior put it on by putting his hands through the side cutouts, and then fastened the armor in front with straps and buckles. In the light of later discoveries, this assumption turned out to be not so far from the truth, but Gimbel clearly did not have enough archaeological material to understand how the system of fastening individual parts of the armor actually worked.
Reconstruction of the Roman legionnaire Carl Gimbel. zen.yandex.ru
Lorica of Corbridge
The most important key to a reliable reconstruction of Roman armor was the discovery made by Charles Daniels in Corbridge. There was once a Roman fort here, Corstopitum, which was garrisoned by the ala Gallorum Petriana. Around 105, barbarian tribes living in the northern part of the island attacked the Roman border fortifications. The camp received serious damage and was subsequently rebuilt. The builders disposed of some of the garbage at the bottom of a well located on the territory of the Roman principle. During excavations in 1964, six sets of plates belonging to the side sections of the shell, two chest sections, shoulder pads, as well as several scattered fragments and small parts were discovered here. Although the iron had turned to rust, all the plates remained in place, making it easy to recreate the original order of their assembly. On the inside of the plates there are clearly visible traces of leather straps used as fastening elements. The bronze hooks and loops are also in place. Interestingly, all the parts found belonged to different armor. Apparently, they were stored all together somewhere in a warehouse awaiting repair, but for some unknown reason they ended up not in the repair shop, but at the bottom of a well, where archaeologists discovered them.
The Corbridge hoard included fragments of Roman armor, weapons and other items thrown into a well in the early 2nd century AD. Reconstruction by Peter Connolly.
H. Russell Robinson, curator of the armory collection at the Tower of London, based on this find, carried out a reconstruction of the Roman armor from Corbridge. According to his assumption, the armor consisted of six parts: a pair of side sections, a pair of sections for the upper chest and back, and a pair of shoulder pads, rigidly connected to the previous section. In total, the armor included 40 iron strips and plates, connected into 12 sections using belts riveted to the inside of them. The individual sections, in turn, were attached to each other by means of bronze hooks and loops, as well as straps and buckles, some of which were on the inside, and some on the outside. This structure made it easy to disassemble the armor and fold it for transportation and storage. Subsequent assembly and dressing were also not particularly difficult. Obviously, the soldier put on the armor assembled on the back, and fastened it in front independently. The lamellar covering fit tightly to the body. At the same time, it was flexible and did not hinder movement at all. Such a shell provided its owner with reliable protection from all types of piercing, slashing and throwing weapons.
Roman Lorica segmentata from Corbridge. Reconstruction by Peter Connolly. Source: Connolly, P. Greece and Rome. Encyclopedia of Military History / Translation by S. Lopukhov, A. Khromov. - M., 2001. - P. 230
Lorica of Newstead
Russell Robinson's reconstruction allowed scientists not only to visualize for the first time what the Roman Lorica segmentata actually looked like, but also to draw conclusions about the design of the armor of a later time, which was found at Newstead between 1905 and 1910. Compared to the Corbridge shell, this armor has minimal decoration and consists of fewer plates, rigidly connected to each other with rivets. Numerous vulnerable bronze fastening elements have been reduced to the necessary minimum.
The chest section was connected to the sides using three hooks: one in the front and two in the back of the armor. The right half of the shell was connected to the left not by means of belt ties, but by a simpler and more reliable system of bronze loops that fit into a rectangular groove on the opposite plate, which was secured in place using a T-shaped spindle inserted into the loop. The finds of large fragments of armor in Carlisle and Caerleon (Great Britain), Zugmantel (Germany), Carnunta (Austria) and Leon (Spain), dating back to the 2nd–3rd centuries, fit into the same constructive scheme.
Roman lorica from Newstead. Drawing by Peter Connolly. Source: Bishop, M. C. Lorica Segmentata Volume I: A Handbook of Articulated Roman Plate Armour. - London, 2002. - R. 55
Finds at Kalkriese
For a long time it was believed that Lorica segmentata appeared in the Roman army around the middle of the 1st century AD, but a real surprise to archaeologists was given by excavations at Mount Kalkriese near Osnabrück in Germany. This place is today identified as the site of the famous battle of the Teutoburg Forest, in which the Cherusci Germans under the leadership of Arminius destroyed three Roman legions of the army of Quintilius Varus. At the very beginning of the excavations in 1994, a fully preserved chest plate with fastening elements was found here, as well as a number of fragments of plates belonging to the shoulder section of the shell. In addition, bronze belt clips, buckles and other fastenings were discovered, dispelling any remaining doubts that the use of Lorica segmentata in the Roman army dates back to a much earlier time than previously thought. Confidence was further strengthened after fragments of lorica fastening elements were discovered among earlier finds at the Dangstetten and Windisch camps in the Alpine region.
Roman lorica from Kalkriese. zen.yandex.ru
In the fall of 2022, excavations at Kalkriese were marked by a new sensational discovery: German archaeologists managed to discover a complete suit of armor in relatively good preservation. When they hit the ground, the individual plates of the shell folded like bellows in an accordion, and the plates sintered together for more than 2000 years. To date, the chest section and shoulders have been partially cleared and restored, while the sides are still in the same block. In the photographs taken by the researchers, the iron plates of the armor are visible, bronze loops, buckles and other fastening elements are clearly visible. Even organic materials, such as remains of leather, were preserved in a small volume.
The new find allows us to take a fresh look at the evolution of the form of armor. It turned out that, in comparison with later finds and images of legionnaires on Trajan's Column, the shoulder pads of the early armor did not have developed “sleeves” to protect the upper part of the forearms - this design detail appeared much later.
Reconstruction of a Roman lorica from Kalkriese.
Origin and chronology of use
The chronology of the use of Lorica segmentata is lost in a haze of uncertainty. The finds in Dangstetten date back to between 15 and 9 BC, which means the possibility of an even earlier appearance than is generally believed today. In this regard, a hypothesis deserves attention, which focuses on the higher protective abilities of plate armor compared to chain mail to provide protection from the arrows of eastern archers and links the appearance and spread of lorica with the military-political initiatives of Augustus directed against the Parthians in 20 BC. Perhaps the model for this armor was the armor of the crupellari gladiators, about which Tacitus writes that it
“unsuitable for attack, but invulnerable to attacks inflicted by the enemy.”
Roman Lorica segmentata from the Corbridge Museum. twitter.com
True, the nature of the borrowing and the direction of influence do not seem obvious - army armor could equally serve as a model for the creation of gladiator armor. In addition, the light and flexible lorica, which does not restrict movements at all, contrasts too strongly with the heaviness of the crupellars, which, according to Tacitus,
“they fell to the ground under the burden of their armor and made no attempt to rise.”
Although the legionnaires depicted on Trajan's Column are uniformly dressed in plate armor, it is now clear that in reality the weapons of Roman soldiers were much more heterogeneous. By creating such a picture, the artist must have sought to present the Roman army to the audience in a more favorable form in comparison with what it might actually have been. It seems appropriate to hypothesize that the lorica segmentata, in the minds of the Romans, was more valuable armor in comparison with chain mail - armor that was worn only by some of the Roman soldiers. Perhaps these were experienced, old-time soldiers who stood in the front ranks of the formation, since such armor protected much better than chain mail from projectiles fired by the enemy. This possibility seems to be hinted at by Vegetius, who mentions the “heavy armor” (gravis lorica), and Mauritius also directly writes, according to whose recommendations soldiers fighting in the front ranks of the formation should wear weapons that are heavier and more complete than those standing behind.
The monument from Alba Iulia in modern-day Romania depicts a Roman soldier dressed in armor. Dating the image is difficult due to the lack of context for the find, but most researchers agree on the second half of the 2nd or even the beginning of the 3rd century AD. roma-victrix.com
Numerous pictorial sources and finds of fragments of armor indicate its widespread use in the 1st–3rd centuries. One of the last images of lorica is a relief on the triumphal arch of Septimius Severus, erected in Rome in 205 to commemorate the victories won by the emperor over the Parthians during the campaigns of 195 and 197–198. Perhaps the image of a warrior dressed in plate armor from the Dacian Alba Iulia dates back to an even later time.
We can only guess about the time of the disappearance of lorica from the arsenals of troops. It seems to be connected with the military-political crisis of the second half of the 3rd century, when the Roman army suffered huge losses in people, weapons and property. At the same time, as finds from Spain show, in some bear corners, lorica remained in service at the end of the 3rd and even at the beginning of the 4th century.
Alexey Kozlenko
/
Blood of the provinces
By what principles was the Roman army of the imperial era recruited and who served in its ranks?
- army
- antiquity
- Ancient Rome
Alexander Sergienya
/
With a word and a spear
How the Roman army of the Principate era fought: field battles
- army
- until the 20th century
- Ancient Rome
Alexander Sergienya
/
"War Machine": Organization of the Ancient Roman Army
How the most powerful army of antiquity was structured
- army
- tactics
- Ancient Rome
Literature:
- Connolly, P. Greece and Rome. Encyclopedia of Military History / Translation by S. Lopukhov, A. Khromov. - M.: Eksmo-Press, 2001.
- Robinson, H.R. The Armor of Imperial Rome. - London: Purnell Book Services, 1975.
- Bishop MC, Coulston JCN Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. — Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2006.
- Bishop, M. C. Lorica Segmentata Volume I: A Handbook of Articulated Roman Plate Armour. - London: Armatura Press, 2002.
- D'Amato R., Sumner G. Arms And Armor of the Imperial Roman Soldier. From Marius to Commodus. - Barnsley: Frontline Books. 2009.
- Junkelmann, M. Die Legionen des Augustus: der römische Soldat im archäologischen Experiment / M. Junkelmann. - Mainz: von Zabern, 2003.
Armor in Rus'
Before the arrival of the Mongols, Russian armor evolved in approximately the same way as in Europe. Chain mail armor remained the main defense of the Russian warrior, until the advent of small arms. As in China, the era of knights and heavy armored cavalry never came. The Russian warrior always had to remain mobile and “light”. In this regard, medium armor seemed a more reasonable choice in the fight against nomadic armies that relied on mobility and horse archers, which is why Russian armor never transitioned to plate armor. The cavalry's armor could be heavier, but still remained in the medium category. So, in addition to standard chain mail, battle armor in Rus' took the form of scales, chain mail with metal plates, as well as mirror armor. Such armor was worn over chain mail and consisted of a metal plate - a mirror, creating a kind of cuirass.
Armor Evolution: Lamellar Armor
Next, evolution occurs - the production of armor for medieval knights from metal begins. One of the varieties is lamellar armor. The first mention of such technology is observed in Mesopotamia. The armor there was made of copper. In the Middle Ages, similar protective technology began to be used in metal. Lammellar armor is a scaly shell. They turned out to be the most reliable. We only got through with bullets. Their main drawback is their weight up to 25 kg. It is impossible to put it on alone. In addition, if a knight fell from his horse, he was completely neutralized. It was impossible to get up.
Japanese armor
The Japanese warrior in armor, called a samurai, is known to everyone. His weapons and armor were always very prominent in the “crowd” of medieval armor and chain mail. As in other regions, samurai did not use armor. Classic samurai armor was primarily lamellar, but breastplates and cuirasses were also used. Various parts of the armor could be made in “chainmail tones”. Japanese chain mail differed from European chain mail not only in appearance, but also in its finer weave. Classic Japanese armor consisted of:
- a helmet that completely covered the head and often the face, usually it was covered with a terrifying mask; the helmet often had horns;
- lamellar armor, sometimes reinforced with a plate, like a mirror or with a cuirass on top;
- leggings and bracers, metal or lamellar, under them there could be chain mail gloves and shoes;
- armor on the shoulder was made of different materials, but their interesting feature was their ease of wearing for archers. In Europe, an archer never wore shoulder pads because they greatly interfered with shooting, while in Japan the shoulder pad seemed to slide back when the bowstring was pulled and returned when the samurai fired a shot.
Such armor, just as in the case of knights, was an indicator of status and wealth. Ordinary soldiers used simpler armor, sometimes chainmail or a mixture.
Myth 2. You should also wear chain mail under your armor
German chain mail of the 15th century.
Image: Metropolitan Museum of Art / Wikimedia Commons This is one of the most common misconceptions. Allegedly, fully equipped knights first put on a gambeson-underarmor, then chain mail (an iron shirt made of many fastened rings), and only on top of all this - armor.
It sounds very impressive, but no knight would wear both chain mail and armor at the same time, because it is very inconvenient. E. Oakeshott chainmail. European Weapons and Armour: From the Renaissance to the Industrial Revolution actually strengthened weak joints. A skirt made of it was also used to cover the groin and lower back.
But they did not wear a solid iron shirt under their armor. Such an “armor pie” is not mentioned in any historical sources - this is an invention of modern role-players and fantasy authors.
Modern armor
The First and Second World Wars showed a new order in the conduct of war. Armor became a relic of the past, and cavalry was also ineffective and was therefore hardly used. In this era, the only armor left was the helmet - the helmet. Helmets protected the head not so much from bullets, but from pieces of rock and stones falling after a shell hit the ground nearby. Attempts to make the first body armor were already in the First World War. Bulky metal plates provided protection, but hampered the soldier’s movement, so they were only good in urban combat. Body armor looked little better during World War II, so this type of protection did not become widespread. The era of body armor began with the Korean War. The vest protected against fragments of mines, grenades, bombs and bullets. In the period from 1950-1990, body armor became part of the equipment of armies around the world. In 1990, a new stage in the development of modern armor began; the image of the defender of the Motherland can no longer be imagined without it. The equipment becomes larger, covering more and more parts of the body. The body armor turns into a personal protection complex and can be tailored to the soldier’s task or certain conditions. Perhaps the evolution of modern armor will go in a similar direction, increasing the degree of protection for soldiers until they are completely clad in a kind of knightly armor.
Armor evolved along with weapons. As soon as protection appeared, weapons immediately appeared that could overcome it. And even though in this race the weapons are often more advanced, the creators of the armor do not lag behind, and sometimes come out ahead, albeit not for long.
Chainmail
The armor of medieval knights in the form of chain mail was the most common. Already in the 12th century they became widespread. The ringed armor weighed relatively little: 8-10 kg. The full set, including stockings, helmet, gloves, reached up to 40 kg. The main advantage is that the armor did not restrict movement. Only the wealthiest aristocrats could afford them. It only became widespread among the middle classes in the 14th century, when wealthy aristocrats donned plate armor. They will be discussed further.
