Historial Armor Thread

File: img04582-20160506-2328.jpg (184KB, 768x955px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 768x955px

Who says that the Romans fought naked? I've literally never heard anyone say that apart from plebs who read Vegetius and think he's a reliable source

File: 5c1f00373e685f962c5e715c642da97f.jpg (234KB, 956x1313px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 956x1313px

>>2799352
Not literally but most depictions only show segmentata and marching clothes during combat.

Even re-enactors somehow dont notice how easily infection could kill half a legion due to cuts after battle.

Honestly naked arms and legs are almost an impossibility but a majority shows it as if it were objectively true instead of maybe the padding being made of organic material that decomposed with age.

>>2799061
>>2799352
>>2799042

looks shit. why was Roman armor so hilariously ugly?

>>2799420

lmao at the retarded looking duck face helmet

File: 0980e6bcfd3f9ff8a16ef0ff355f3271.jpg (59KB, 564x846px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 564x846px

>>2799444
>why was Roman armor so hilariously ugly

They coudnt figure out how to affordably make articulations. They'd rather manufacture the pieces in mass and let someone build it also they coudnt be bothered to fit it to everyone. As for the rest plates clean their own edges and prevents rust with movement and helmets are like that so you can hear the centurion yelling.

>ugly

pleb

File: 1494165979703.jpg (261KB, 675x845px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 675x845px

fkn roman plebs

80% of Romans used Lorica squamata,Lorica Hamata and Lorica plumata at all times in their post-Carthaginian war history.

Lorica segmentata was used by a few specialised legions either on the German border or in the Dacian wars.
,

>No military art ever shows romans wearing Scale/Mail armor
>No military art ever shows auxilia or foreign units
rreeeeeeee

>>2799505
full plate and halberds is aesthetic as fuck

File: 1.jpg (126KB, 1111x719px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1111x719px

Terrible and ground warfare. Great at siege. Neatest armor in the biz.

File: Crupellarius_legioXXX_3.jpg (3MB, 1920x2560px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x2560px

*blocks your path*

File: average roman.jpg (180KB, 374x497px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 374x497px

Imagine how my brotha hannibal felt when he saw 2 million of these bad ass motherfuckers storming Gaul on elephants

>>2799444
You are a nigger

File: Mx8iTaTcxDM.jpg (125KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1000x750px

>scared.jpg

File: Lorica Manica.jpg (88KB, 703x800px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 703x800px

In all honesty, it would be pretty brutal for someone from this century to go back in time and actually see how things were.

It would probably be like an alternate universe because honestly we know so little of it all.

I mean, Romans had enough technology to invent the steam engine.

I honestly think seeing armors from the middle ages after rome as an evolution might actually be wrong. Maybe the scraps ad pieces we find are not all there is to it.

Maybe the city that managed to have 1 million people (fact only replicated in 1810 by london in the west) actually was pretty different than what we currently see it as.

Humans love to tell stories, and most of what we have are stories of the stories told.

>>2801699

A toy that spins is not a steam engine.

>>2801700
In the 1st century AD, Heron of Alexandria created the aeolipile, a basic steam engine. Using the technology he created 'automated' doors for an Apollian temple. It was pretty useless but still.

If they had this at 1AD then they had the ability at least to jump forwards to what would be the years leading to 1712.

>>2801700
They had pistons, valves, gears, and pulleys.

That's all you really need to build a steam engine.

Unfortunately, the emperors came along and destroyed classical civilization.

>>2801717
>That's all you really need to build a steam engine.

no you faggot shut up forever

>>2801700

All they needed for an industrial revolution to take place was coal. If only they had put the two together we might be speaking today from an united Roman Europe with Rome as the capital of the world.

>>2801721
Okay.

What technology, other than gearing, valves, or pistons do you need?

File: ZES.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>2801721
To build a basic steam engine? Yes thats all that is required.

>>2801731

durable enough metals which in turn require hotter forges, and the mechanics to actually control and harvest the energy of an engine in a safe, practical way

>>2801742
The Romans had Damascus steel though.

Also, do you think the Savery and Newcomen engines were made out of tool steel?

>>2801742
Metal is of absolutely no issue. There is not much difference from what they had to what would be used later on on machinery. The steam has the temperature of boiling water, no more.

And as i told you, all that was lacking was the coal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESfSG2OlQYQ

They`d start by using it to make flour in small scale.

>>2801755
>The steam has the temperature of boiling water, no more.
The temperature of the steam isn't the issue. The issue is the heat that's going to be producing the steam in the first place. You'd need a metal chamber to hold the water being heated, and, given the ridiculous heat capacity of water versus metals, you're going to have the chamber itself heated to a ridiculous degree long before the water itself will get to boiling point.

That, combined with the high pressure of the system, is where the issue is going to come in - the metal probably won't melt, but it very well could get to the point where the metal is dangerously weakened.

So did the Romans have the same metallurgical technologies as Europe in the Industrial Revolution?

>>2801755
Wikipedia is telling me

>In Roman Britain, the Romans were exploiting all major coalfields (save those of North and South Staffordshire) by the late 2nd century AD.[7] While much of its use remained local, a lively trade developed along the North Sea coast supplying coal to Yorkshire and London.[7] This also extended to the continental Rhineland, where bituminous coal was already used for the smelting of iron ore.[7] It was used in hypocausts to heat public baths, the baths in military forts, and the villas of wealthy individuals. Excavation has revealed coal stores at many forts along Hadrian's Wall as well as the remains of a smelting industry at forts such as Longovicium nearby.[citation needed]

I'd wager that the real problem was the lack of corporate and patent law in Roman times.

>>2801776
If I'm not mistaken, damascus and noric steel had pretty similar material properties to the crucible steel available during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution.

Also, I'm like 90% sure that before the invention of the Bessemer process and open hearth process, steam engines were made out of cast iron.

The boiling water should cool the metal in the heating chamber enough to prevent structural failure.

This being said, early steam engines also tended to explode and kill people because there was some metallurgical defect in the pressure vessel. Didn't stop people from using them.

>>2801777
Well we are also talking Britain and then Alexandria.
I think they coudnt place the to together because it was harder to find it in africa. Either that or they were just uninterested due to more pressing political concerns. But it damn well could have been the case that lacking patents were the problem.

>>2801776
Pretty much they did have it, yes. I dont know about a major change in forging. I know about changes in the scales of it, as in much more being able to be forged and faster, but nothing that would be too significant to an engine`s construction. You could even use bronze for most of the parts.

Yes there would be accidents, however i am talking here to the leading years to the revolution, not the revolution itself. I am saying they could have very well be going in that direction very soon had the situation not been disturbed and innovation kept on happening.

>>2801806
Keep in mind that you can totally run steam engines on wood.

If I recall correctly, this was standard practice in parts of the US before imports and domestic sources of coal showed up.

If the Roman Legion had continued to exist and be financed (lets say, as an arm of the Papal State) and kept all its arms and armour correct to the Roman era, at what point would they be obsolete?

Would Roman Legionaries be effective during the Crusades?

>>2801829
At the 11th century they would be the equivalent to the muslims.

>>2801833
>>2801829
However, the tactical advantage of a Legion would be fun to see.

At this point in history people have dished out discipline and order and instead opt for personal strength. So an organized professional trained and orderly legion would be a very odd thing to battle. I believe it would work in the Legion`s favor.

>>2801829
Massed heavy infantry went out of style before they were obsolete in the technical sense.

For example, in the tenth century, a legion could be effective, but it would be very hard to raise and outfit given the extreme decentralization of the era, and it would suffer tremendously from the new, stirrup using knights.

During the later stages of the WRE, and throughout the history of the ERE, you see infantry become less relevant compared to cavalry.

Heavy infantry got sidelined by doctrine, not so much by technology.

>>2801787

The Romans didn't know how to make Damascus/Crucible steel, what they had was imported from India. That supply relied on the Parthian/Sassanid empire not nicking all the good stuff for themselves.

The critical thing about the "classical era" steam engine is that it doesn't have an expansion chamber. Without the sealed chamber, it generates power from pure thrust, which is extremely inefficient.

I'd say that steam power is not the most important thing at first. First they need good water wheels that can take advantage of rotational motion. The Song Chinese some 5-600 years later had that, but they didn't get to go farther before getting invaded by the Jurchens and shifting their focus onto military inventions.

File: m9BZJPXB1fo.jpg (130KB, 712x658px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 712x658px

back on topic, cunts

File: army_of_diocletian_by_johnnyshumate-d6es6ot.jpg (283KB, 753x1062px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 753x1062px

>>2801829
What are you talking about? The Legion as an organisational unit didn't tangibly exist by the end of the WRE, there's no reason it would've existed after.
>kept all its arms and armour correct to the Roman era
They didn't stop using that equipment for financial reasons or any other esoteric reason you might be thinking of. They stopped using it because it stopped being useful.

Roman Legions, in the classical sense of the late Republican and early Imperial legions, were obsolete by the end of the 3rd century. They'd get steamrolled by a Crusader army.

But the mobile field armies of the later Roman Army would do comparatively very well, considering how they were equipped and organised.

>>2802822
What specific advantages would a crusader army have over a traditional late Republican Army?

Would better heavy cavalry play that much of a difference?

>>2802925
seconding the first question

File: 27b85a9da3d903b79f472a0083307e46.jpg (511KB, 1200x1031px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1200x1031px

And a ching-chong nip-nong to yall.

>>2799042
Shame most of their metal armor was mass produced and not of the highest quality.

>>2799420
You are seriously overestimating the chance of a cut becoming infected. You can potentially take dozens of sword wounds over the term of your career and not die.

That and Caesar himself literally stated he had up to 90% of his soldiers wounded at times. Battle scarred veterans are a trope because they actually existed.

File: Gerhard_von_Kügelgen_portrait_of_Friedrich.jpg (1MB, 1443x1871px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1443x1871px

>>2801726
>All they needed for an industrial revolution to take place was coal.

Some people actually believe this.

Tell me, was all that was needed for the invention of the car gasoline?

>>2802925
Better cavalry for one.

Horse breeding, saddle development, couched lances, extensive mail armor and a stirrup would give your Crusader knights and Sargaents an advantage over their Roman peers.

As far as I know the Romans only began experimenting with heavier cavalry around the Dacian wars of Trajan.

File: americans-in-japan-1890.png (304KB, 425x614px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 425x614px

Burger in sushi armour.

>>2803263
Was he a manlet or did they make custom made shit for him>

>>2799505
useless without a shield and something on that besegew mount

>>2800475
*chops your toes*

>>2803407
>useless without a shield and something on that besegew mount

What did he mean by this?

>>2803263
Hey, it's Ken-Sama

>>2802925
>What specific advantages would a crusader army have over a traditional late Republican Army?
The same advantages Pyrrhus' armies had over Rome's, plus higher quality weapon and armor.
It's really an issue of usage, Rome needs versatile armies ready to be deployed in any situation, from garrison duty to bigass wars, from mountain passes to fucking deserts. The crusaders had one playground and one kind of confrontation, so they were specialized.

File: 2fbf5aa3722081ca23043ca581a0bc31.jpg (95KB, 553x825px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 553x825px

SEA had armor

>>2803165
Feudal Japan is underrated af
>Emperor and his posses are so into art and so disconnected from the country that you establish a military dictatorship over him to keep things in order

>>2803448
It's Ken-Sama's great-great grandfather, George-Sama.

"Gomenasai, my name is George-Sama.

I am of 35 years of age, and an American Japanophile (Lover of Japanese culture for all you gaijins). I practice calligraphy on rice-paper, and spend my days perfecting my arts practicing Japanese arts. (Kenjutsu, Tea ceremonies etc.)

I practice with my Katana every day, this magnifiscent sabre can cut clean through three confederate necks in a row because it is folded over a thousand times, and is vastly superior to any other weapon on this earth. I commissioned my sword to a local master two years ago, and I have been getting better with it every day.

I speak Japanese fluently, both Kanto and the Osakan dialect. I know everything about Japanese history and the bushido code of honor, which I follow to the fullest.

I own several sets of armor, which I wear around town. I want to get used to wearing them, so I can fit in easier with the locals. I bow to my elders and and speak Japanese as often as I can, but rarely does anyone manage to respond to me.

Wish me luck in my oriental endeavors!"

>>2800484
Too bad they destroyed Carrhae completely, we'll never get records of their thoughts

File: Ottoman Armour 1.jpg (126KB, 410x1119px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 410x1119px

Ottoman armour

File: Ottoman Armour 2.jpg (51KB, 328x514px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 328x514px

>>2804654

File: Ottoman Empire Armor - Krug.jpg (626KB, 743x901px) Image search: [Google]

626KB, 743x901px

>>2804658

>>2803193
People really don't get how much complexity there is in industrial era machines.
This series is one of my favorites in describing all the innovations that were required for the industrial revolution to really begin. Its a good watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFQ-f1Ax_Pg&list=PLBwC0sil0vDlO828OYQfPiSBHivdePxNK

>>2802822
>What are you talking about?
A completely hypothetical question. Hell, the Vatican still keeps pikes around.

>>2805237
A few advances like the assembly line or Bessemer process didn't require technology outside the reach of the Medieval era.

>>2805237
The first generation of steam engines were pretty different from the golden age of steam ones.

As long as you can create a feasible technology to pique interest, incremental improvements tend to optimize the concept over time

>>2801726
>All they needed for an industrial revolution to take place was coal
no there's a lot more to it than that, roman banking and business law were extremely primitive

>>2805466
I imagine it would have been possible for a much more gradual industrial revolution to happen during the Roman Republic or Ming Dynasty China.

The Industrial Revolution had the benefit of coming during a Scientific Revolution, and a revolution in trade triggered by trans-oceanic navigation.

So if steam engines, railroads, or blast furnaces had been implemented earlier, you'd expect to see a more piecemeal introduction, along the lines of waterwheels and windmills during the Middle Ages.

More of an Industrial Evolution if you would.

>>2805366
They probably don't require that much technology, but the need for capital, the population demographics at the time, the legal framework of the early britian at the time. Along with the needs and demands. The Newcomen was needed to pump water out of coal mines, because coal was the new fuel used to heat homes, because there were scant few forests left in Britan for wood.

>>2805466
This is also a very important point. The idea of a joint stock company, was still on the wrong side of a millennium away. These financial institutions were a key part in allowing for industry to thrive in the way it did.

>>2805496
For the bessemer process specifically, it wouldn't be that hard to implement with the technology of the time if the basic principle was understood.

Then again, I don't know how easy it was to get pig iron before the blast furnace.

File: 1493934806190.jpg (16KB, 200x303px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 200x303px

>>2805532
>it wouldn't be that hard to implement with the technology of the time if the basic principle was understood

They didn't even have fucking coke yet. How do you expect them to get to the bessemer process?

This is classic alt his fantasy wank designed solely to see DA INDUSTRAILZIED RUMANS!!!1one without any consideration for the sheer timescale involved. Might as well have fucking aliums deliver the blast furnace and the Bessemer process to Rome.

>>2805558
I'm not saying that the product would be good quality or high quantity.

But with enough charcoal, and enough fan air, it would be technically feasible.

>>2805564
The problem is that technically feasible is very much different then economical or valuable. We've had the technology to send a man to mars since the Apollo program, but we haven't because it's too fucking expensive. Besides unless someone had pre-knowledge of the value of industrialization or they were the most forward thinking person in history, no-one would invest time energy or money into industry. The fucking sumerians could have invented gunpowder, but they didn't because no-one was pushing for it, and if they had they would have had few uses for it and it would have been lost to history. Innovation and technological advancement requires a purpose

>>2805573
>if they had they would have had few uses for it

Bruh, you can totally build cannons out of bronze.

Gunpowder is the posterchild for world changing technologies that were discovered by random change, and not as a logical development of some other technology.

>>2805564
>with charcoal

No, it wouldn't. Charcoal doesn't burn nearly hot enough for the Bessemer process even with convection. You can melt iron in a blast furnace but you're not getting to Bessemer steel. Are you high or just that retard who thought he could build an internal combustion engine with Iron age tech? What the hell are you, even? MacGyver of the 1st century AD?

It's a fucking joke. Lay off the meds.

>>2805580
Good point that was a bad example, but the principle still stands

>>2805585
Charcoal burns hotter than coke?

Aren't they both essentially pure carbon?

File: wefefefefe.png (29KB, 591x434px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 591x434px

>>2805594
>Charcoal burns hotter than coke

What the fuck am I reading

>>2805598
Oh shit, that wasn't the question I was trying to ask.

Coke burns hotter than charcoal? Aren't they chemically very similar?

File: jack chains.jpg (72KB, 488x640px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 488x640px

why do the roman era scale armors tend to have the ring of scales around the shoulders like in >>2802822?

also reminder that peasant armor is best armor

File: 1cdf67a38574a1e1ee4c95e5baa09667.jpg (85KB, 564x418px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 564x418px

>>2802822
MUCH better metal quality

>>2807671
What the fuck are they doing?

File: 4mlw49k6.jpg (98KB, 766x650px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 766x650px

>>2807690
Praying before battle

>>2806121
I don't know the specific n an email for it but it acts as a little extra protection for your shoulders and upper torso, I'm assuming because that's where you have the least fat so a blow from above that hits you there would be very painful.

File: amato.jpg (557KB, 942x1298px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 942x1298px

>>2807978
>n a email
This should be "name"

That's what I get for phoneposting

File: 11th_century_battle_imagery.jpg (20KB, 506x100px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 506x100px

>>2801847
Since the development of warfare in formation, there haven't been many examples of individualist tactics. The superiority of tightly packed warriors forced their opponents to adopt to that.

>>2805580
It took a few centuries before they weaponized it though, didn't it?

>>2807982
The Roman infantry tactics were generally quite individualist compared to others.

They deliberately used some cobsiderable spacing to give individual soldiers the room they needed to employ the gladius properly. Without room to move they were susceptible to being kept at bay and vulnerable to longer weapons.

Hoplites had this problem. When engaging phalangites or peltasts they were outranged and too rigid to do anything about it.

>>2801699
>Rome wassuper advanced meme
They took what was given but did not invent
Also the one million was only kept because of the free grain that's it

>>2808104
Which is why their shields weresolarge

File: Swiss Lords1.jpg (3MB, 6486x1732px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6486x1732px

>>2808430
She's totally 'mirin the 'stethics

>>2799042
>consul trumpus
I know it's an armour autism thread but at least use the Latin translation of trump rather than being an alt right kneckbeard

File: Pike combat.jpg (1MB, 1010x1370px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1010x1370px

>>2808538

File: 1475 - Swiss Pikemen.jpg (68KB, 691x792px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 691x792px

>>2808546
What would you use? Not OP, but I'm interested

>>2808549

File: Ottomans fail to take the bridge from the Holy Roman Empire'.jpg (1MB, 3552x1734px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3552x1734px

>>2808563

File: Arqubusier2.jpg (1MB, 1425x1992px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1425x1992px

>>2808585

File: unfair duel.jpg (841KB, 1909x1163px) Image search: [Google]

841KB, 1909x1163px

>>2808588

File: Swiss fighting in the streets.jpg (1MB, 3766x1808px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3766x1808px

>>2808594

File: Ottoman blunderbuss.jpg (88KB, 2690x628px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 2690x628px

>>2808607

File: dueling shields.jpg (318KB, 1600x1120px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 1600x1120px

>>2808612

File: Keeping horsemen at bay.jpg (2MB, 3916x2214px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3916x2214px

>>2808627

File: Arquebus2.jpg (109KB, 1116x728px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1116x728px

>>2808631

File: Defending against the Sultan.jpg (617KB, 1290x1263px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 1290x1263px

>>2808643

File: 1515 - Swiss Soldiers.gif (65KB, 650x675px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 650x675px

>>2808658

File: jannisaries in combat.jpg (381KB, 800x805px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 800x805px

>>2808661

File: Jannisaries in battle.jpg (563KB, 1330x900px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 1330x900px

>>2808667

File: Ming musket.jpg (31KB, 550x303px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 550x303px

>>2808671

File: Ming artillery.png (292KB, 1104x1600px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1104x1600px

>>2808673

File: Ming fire lance.jpg (21KB, 480x339px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x339px

>>2808676

File: Ming half-side plate armor - anti-musket attempt.jpg (38KB, 580x407px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 580x407px

>>2808678

>>2808681
Wat is he holding? A tree?

>>2800484
>2nd punic war
>segmentata
>imperial italic helmet

That pic you posted is a Principate era Legionnaire you retard

>>2809126
Thats the joke,Its ironic

>>2800213
Is there anything more aesthetic than surcoats?

>>2800475
>triggered

>>2808988
http://greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com/2014/08/unique-weapon-of-ming-dynasty-lang-xian.html

It certainly is... unique

>>2799042
>>2799491
>>2801699
>>2799061
Did simple cohort really wear arm plates?
I always though that only cavalry wore them.

>>2801717
>>2801721
>>2801726
>>2801732
>>2801711
>>2801699

>'HEY GUYS COME INVEST IN MY WHACKY NEW LABOUR SAVING IDEA'
>ignoring the fact that slaves exist

>>2810187
Slaves still cost money to operate fampai.

>>2801777
>>2801806
You are retarded, you know that?
1)No scientific theory to push discovers
2)No /reason/ to invest in new labour saving engines. Need lots of labour? Slaves exist.
Why waste money on some crazy steam idea when you can have slaves do it for far cheaper.

>>2810153
>Can be used to prevent friendly troops from seeing the face of their angry, screaming enemies directly, thus maintaining morale. This is especially important since most Ming troops were poorly trained

kek

>>2801829
Retard alert

The 'Roman era' is from 753 bc to 1453 ad. The arms and armour always carried on and evolved.

Or are you a faggot who thinks 'muh movie styled romans' are the only ones that exist?

>>2810191
Yet it's cheaper to buy slaves then it is to invest in steam engines.

Steam is risky and isn't going to pay you back, not for a few generations at best, a century or more at worse. With no large scale market competition between merchants or national markets, there is fuck all reason for a roman noble to put his money in 'steam' compared to just using slaves.

>>2810227
>have massive fleet going from Alexandria to Rome continuously back and forth again
>said fleet depends on the trade winds
>implying mechanizing this fleet would not be absurdly profitable
>have collieries
>need to pump them out
>implying being able to make the coal pump out its own mine wouldn't be massively profitable

also

>implying 1 HP peak and .1 HP sustained is an economically viable amount of energy
>implying the Romans used human power for any task they could do with oxen or horses

Basically, ur a gay

>>2810441
You're not getting it are you.
You're looking at it from a modern perspective, knowing where steam would lead.

If you're someone at the time, who can invest in slaves, or this crazy steam that can, at best in the early versions, slowly open a door, you're going to go with slaves.

While industrialisation is better overall, there's no reason for a slave based economy and society to put in the initial funding and investments into steam research.

>>2808563
sauce anon

>>2801745
>The Romans had Damascus steel though.
They couldn't reliably produce steel at all.

>>2811911
They could buy it from the east though.

Also, they did eventually get Noric steel by way of the Celts.

>>2811925
>They could buy it from the east though.
Not reliably. You seem to be missing the part where Rome was constantly going to war on their eastern border.
>Also, they did eventually get Noric steel by way of the Celts.
Which was literally only produced in one place.

Most roman "steel" was absolute garbage.

>>2811944
>Which was literally only produced in one place

Yeah, but the Romans actually had real trade networks.

Not to mention the basic fact that early steam engines were cast iron and only operated at around 5 psi

>>2811971
"trade networks" are utterly irrelevant when you don't have enough of a good to satisfy demand and no additional sources exist.


As it was you'd be lucky to get anything but very loq quality steel for weapons or armor, and surgeons would fucking kill for norican steel tools.

The odds of it being used for devices that serve no purpose in a slave state are close to zero. You'd have to be wealthy to bother, and if you were, you'd just buy more slaves.

File: dis18217_consider-the-following.jpg (37KB, 300x301px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 300x301px

>>2811996
>serve no purpose in a slave state

But the Romans were extensive users of water wheels, archimedes screws, and pumping devices.

If waterpower wasn't available, the Romans usually then used oxen or horses.

>>2803507
>same advantages Pyrrhus' armies had over Rome's
absolutely none whatsoever

>>2805600
H20 and H202 are "chemically similar"

>>2812085
Yes, he won most of his battles with rome without any advantages.

File: 8b509dd2fcd95fa676d33ea456b4fbc2.jpg (74KB, 563x1131px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 563x1131px

BUFF COAT
U
F
F

So this thread just splunged into people who think the civ series tech tree is how history works?

>>2808588
"anyway, here's wonderwall"

Roman armor from the 1st century AD to the 3rd century is the apex of armor aesthetic

>>2813905

Question, why weren't "cages" like that common in previous eras? It lookes like it would go really well with a Roman or Greek helmet, two or three bars in the front could completely block off a sideways slash or a head on thrust of a broad sword, but without adding bulk or affecting awareness. Something like a football helmet's mouth cage could fit in great in a Galea.

Besides this, Roman cavalry used masks that flipped down right? Why were simpler versions of these not used by infantry when they began using far more extensive and covering helmet designs?

>>2800484
history channel please go

>>2818191
If there were such small pieces, it would have rusted and fallen off completely and be seen as separate parts of steel instead of a joint thing when we go diggin.

Thats the reason why we dont see smaller pieces of plate in romans as well.

>>2801755
Temperature and energy is not the same thing. You'll get worse burns from 100° steam than 100° every time because of the massive differences in energy between those states.

>>2820066

We'd see them in iconography

Still, Romans did end up using nasal guards later, but i dunno what changed to make them desirable.

>>2818191
The clearest answer I think is that they weren't too concerned about it.
A Roman would primarily face thrusts and projectiles as threats to the face. For this, the brim and cheekguard was probably considered adequate.
Any cost, bulk and weight that could be saved, would be saved.

That cavalryman on the other hand has no shield and is more likely to take cuts to the head. Hence a bar guard for the face makes sense.

>>2821560
Also note the considerably smaller cheekguards on the lobster pot. In fact, they don't cover the cheeks at all.

>>2801699
>Maybe the city that managed to have 1 million people (fact only replicated in 1810 by london in the west)

Baghdad beat that a millenium before London

>>2805600
Are we talking coke as in coca-cola?

>>2821810
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coke_(fuel)

>>2808104
I had read the exact opposite. The Roman legionary tactics essentially evolved from the phalanx. The gladius is basically a big knife, too short for any kind of individual fencing but perfect for steamrolling enemies. The legion was more of a machine than an army of individual killers.

The Battle of Watling Street, where the Romans ended Boudicca's rebellion, is a good example.

how could rome afford all that armor?

>>2821810
This is the most American post I've ever seen on this board

>>2821919
Correct
>>2808104
That's exactly the oppostite.

>>2801699
A lot of evidence shows history was different than the image most people have and most historians paint.

I'm sure for example the gladiatoral games are nothing like on TV, but that's probably common hostorical knowledge by now.

I was looking at some news paper clippings & letters from the 1920's and even that shocked me at how different historical events were and how people acted.

>>2821919
>>2808104
Isn't it a combination of both?

The Romans acted like a machine rather than individual fighters but fought with much more spacing than usual where idiot barbarians trying to crash through would open themselves up to multiple well grounded Legionairies. They had to have enough spacing for them to file through & sandwiching tightly packed groups of people really messes with someone's ability to handle a weapon, whereas just because Romans were spaced out didn't make them any less a wall of steel & churning blades, probably moreso since they had the space for each one to strike, while those beside & behind could also lundge in.

>>2822392

they used both formations depending on the context because they were developed to be flexible.

Roman legionaries were, however, just as wild, daring, and aggressive as any barbarian they faced, there's accounts of Legionaries pulling ridiculous stunts while in a drunken, angry fervor.

>>2822401
Well yeah fair enough, you kind of had to have some aggression to have a bunch of midgets conquer the known world & kill people face to face consistently. Good on em, doing manlets a solid everywhere.

>>2821695

It's in one of the most fertile regions on Earth, and it had an amazing irrigation system.

>>2817040

The late army was aesthetic too. Constantine's especially so.

>>2821929
Population. When compared to middle ages Rome probably had more steel workers as well as more revenue than anybody. For every soldier there were far above the sun tzu required 7 civilians. Probably more like 500 civilians for every soldier even without counting for slaves and it had an integral trade throughout the land that allowed for there never to be a lack of resources. Resulting in steady prices.

Besides, it was not personal work, things were streamlined. Armors were made in sizes similar to how shirts are made today and they were mostly munition grade like early 17th century armor instead of 15th century plate.

The only difference through the times is whether or not a legionaire has to purchase his armour or if it is given to him by the state.

>>2821088
>iconography

Something not often understood is that not protecting oneself during battle was an act of courage. Such as fighting naked being the ultimate courageous act.

Having Roman soldiers only wearing chest protection and therefore giving a fair chance to savages was an act of propaganda. If they had the choice on drawing more armor or less armor they`d go for less because it paints a good picture.

>>2824571

We see the Lorica Segmentata used to an unrealistic degree in Trajan's column though, clearly the Romans were proud of their cool shinny armors.

>>2799444
wasted trips on such a plebian comment

>>2810169
>Did simple cohort really wear arm plates?
>I always though that only cavalry wore them.

Lorica segmentata was rarely and shortly used, most Roman soldiers wore lorica hamata, segmentata is a hollywood meme