Roman Body Armor :: essays research papers

During the expansion of Rome and the acquisition of new territory, the Roman armies were often met by heavy resistance and bloody conflicts. The armies needed a type of protection that would safely protect soldiers and would ensure victory for Rome.That is the reason armour (upper embody) in particular was implemented to save soldiers on the battlefield. The armour had to tack certain standards of construction for it to be useful Of these standards the first was that armour was to be flexible enough to allow the wearer freedom of movement in battle. Secondly, it had to be light it could be worn without wearing down the soldier, while still protecting him against an opponents weapon and finally, the armour had to be made at low cost. These three aspects were authoritative in the evolution of armour design in the Roman army. The main study point ofRoman armour is that it was a trade off between freedom of movement, protection, and cost factor. In the first century A.D. there were about four types of armour in use. The names of the different types were muscle, scale, mail, and part mail and the segmented breastplate being the leading type. Studying of these armour types relies upon three main sources of evidence iconographic archaeological and literary source documents.The evolution of Roman armour was influenced by the needs and circumstances of the Roman Army. Armies of the first century A.D. were finally established within theEmpire and control fell solely under the Emperor. With the increase of soldiers in theRoman army, which was up to around thirty legions, well built armour was more in need than ever on the frontiers. The army could be carve up into two distinct parts the legion and the auxiliary. Only Roman citizens could become a legionnaire, while the auxiliary were made of non citizens from Romes settled territories. The early view post forward by a historian named Webster was that the equipment used by the legionnaires was remarkably uniform th roughout the empire. However, there has been no evidence that supports this theory, showing that a neat number of types and ages of equipment was in use at anyone time. Peterson argues that uniform armour in the Roman army may have only extended to the soldiers having their own body armour, helmet, weapons and shield showing a common trademark. Bishop and Coulston suggest that in this period soldiers purchased their own equipment.