Talk:Lorica hamata

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lorica hamata article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Related task forces... Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD) Weaponry task force

[edit] Bronze Chainmail ?

Chainmail made of Bronze? It sounds strange. The earliest mentions and samples of this type of armor we have got come from iron cultures, for good reason.

Bronze lends itself well to casting and forging, but lacks the ductility of iron, and is not very useful as wire, being too stiff and prone to breaking. On the other hand, the production of chainmail, especially in large quantities, depends on the rings being mass produced from wire, rather than hand fashioned one at a time. Neither would mass-cast rings be too practical, as you would still need to link them together, which is easier with wire ones that lend themselves more easily to this kind of manipulation, before being hammered closed.

Are there any sources for bronze chainmail? --Svartalf 14:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard that Roman mail was made from anything other than iron. All modern reproductions I've ever seen (and I own a suit of lorica hamata myself) are iron or steel. Suggest we edit this statement, as I think it's probably false.--Caliga10 12:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accuracy

This paragraph

Around 5AD the Lorica Hamata became less common as Lorica Segmentata was much cheaper and quicker to make - an important fact when there were so many men to arm. However some African and Asian legions are thought to have kept it till it became standard issue again in the last years of the Empire.

was recently added and I think it's inaccurate. My understanding is that lorica segmentata was only in use from 0-5 AD until about 70 AD, and probably never worn by even the majority of legionaries during that time period. Other opinions?--Caliga10 11:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, the conventional thinking is that Lorica Segmentata was always less widespread than Lorica Hamata and probably fell out of what general use it had enjoyed in the Late Second Century / Early Third Centuray AD; the reasons for it's introduction and eventual disappearance remain matters open to debate.--M.J.Stanham 21:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)