OneSixthFigures

An online community to discuss and share news about sixth-scale figures, with an emphasis on either custom or commercial articulated figures.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Empty Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review on Mon 27 May 2019 - 15:26

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
2019 has already seen the release of five sixth-scale Roman-period military figures by two companies, and there is at least one more in the works. Although they arrived months ago, it is only now that I've had time to begin some product reviews. I begin with the three Roman infantry figures by Kaustic Plastik.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0510

Introduction

The three infantry figures are a centurion, a legionary, and an auxiliary ("Auxilia Cohors") from Kaustic Plastik's The Legions of Rome - The Armies of the Roman Empire series. All three figures purport to portray the Roman military of the 1st century AD, i.e., the Julio-Claudian and Flavian periods of the Roman Empire. Kaustic Plastik figures are designed on the advice of archaeologists/military history consultants and claim a high degree of historical accuracy. That said, one should note that there is plenty of disagreement over the interpretation of pictorial, written, and archaeological evidence, and some of the design choices would be open to doubt.

The sets employ Kaustic Plastik bodies (KP04) and head sculpts and stand about 11.5 inches (29.5 cm) tall.

Packaging - 3/4 stars

All three figures come in identical boxes featuring a dark posterized version of a photo of two figures' helmeted heads overprinted with the Legions of Rome logo on the front, a general historical introduction on the back, and images of all four figures of this line (the three reviewed here, plus a cavalryman whom I will review separately) on the sides. Inside the box there is a relatively thin black foam sheet, under it a thick foam trey for the figure and some of its accessories, and under that a second, more shallow foam trey for additional accessories, including the action figure stand and the shields. The use of foam treys is commendable, and everything is reasonably safe, although some items do become loose. Inside there is also a little paper slip with a printed notice that the helmets are very delicate, should be handled carefully, and if any of the small fittings become loose it is recommended to affix them with Gorilla Superglue. So why take off one star? Because of the reusing the same box and decor for all figures in the line. This is arguably lazy, but while I do not care much about the boxes (as long as they do their job), the figures come without any instructions, and having more, larger, and varied images of each figure (on its respective box) would have been handy when trying to kit it out fully. On the other hand, if this cost-saving measure accounts for the relatively inexpensive price, that aspect is appreciated.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0110

Sculpting - 3/4 stars

By sculpting I mean primarily the head sculpts, although there are plenty of sculpted details on the plastic and metal accessories that make up each figure's armor and weaponry. In the latter case, the detail is fairly accurate and quite exquisite, even if not always super sharp. In the former case, two out of the three heads are very well sculpted, while that of the auxiliary has the same high production quality, but suffers from fairly caricature-like features that detract from the intended realism. Moreover, all three head sculpts are reused from Kaustic Plastik products we have seen before: the centurion's head came with the KP03B body, the legionary's head came with the KP04B body, and the auxiliary's head came with "Valerius - Roman Legionary" ("Ancient Rome - The Roman Army - Legio XIV Gemina, Invasion of Britain circa 49 AD"). While I appreciate any savings in cost, this reuse is hardly something that impresses in the new products.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0310

Paint - 3.5/4 stars

Generally speaking, the paint job is very good -- and even in instances where it is not particularly clean, that is perhaps on purpose, certainly contributing to the look of worn, used equipment. The most elaborate and detailed paintwork is on the head sculpts (see photo above), and that tends to be excellent, with plenty of good detail and nuance. There is also some fairly intricate paintwork involved with the various tiny sculpted details on the armor (centurion), sheaths (all figures), and shields. The "chain" mail on the auxiliary (and also on the cavalryman I would be reviewing separately) is made of molded rubber and has a very convincing paint treatment ranging from silverish to dark grey.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0810

Articulation and Poseability - 2.5/4 stars

Why add "poseability" to the description of this category? Because it is different from the articulation, as I will show. In terms range of movement (articulation), the Kaustic Plastik bodies are very good, featuring almost everything you might want, including double-jointed knees and elbows, good ankles and wrists, ab crunch, etc. Naturally, the outfits and especially the armor (whether the molded rubber "chain" mail or the hard plastic "muscle" cuirass) get in the way a little bit, but that is normal. In fact, I am surprised at how little they hinder the range of movement (though I have not necessarily shown its full limits in the photos). A bonus for the kitbasher are the removable arms, which are pretty much a must if you want to remove or swap some of the outfit. However, when it comes to the ability to pose the figures, the products are plagued with difficulty. The knee and ankle joins in particular are fairly loose, and when you add to this the weight of plastic and metal weapons and armor, it becomes exceedingly difficult to achieve a balanced unassisted standing pose in any animated stance. For example, see the legionary in the photo below? He had to lean on his shield to stand in this stance, which wasn't even what I was going for in the first place. So while the articulation is good in itself, the poseability is fairly poor.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri1010

Accessories - 3/4 stars

Since we are looking at three figures at once, let's start with what they have in common: the "deluxe" figure stand, the dagger (pugio) with its sheath hanging from the military belt (cingulum militare), the sword (gladius) with its sheath hanging from a baldric, the two sets of hands (spear/sword/knife grip and trigger grip -- the latter is somewhat surprising given the nature of the product). The weapons' blades are made of metal, while the hands are made of fairly soft plastic -- something this reviewer appreciates, given the typical challenges of making a figure hold a shield or swapping weapons. Each figures comes with its own distinctive plastic shield -- the centurion and legionary have a similar and familiar design (scutum), but with slight variations, while the auxiliary sports an oval shield with painted decoration. At least generally speaking, this appears accurate for the period, although the universal reliance on red is a bit of a modernist cliche. The centurion sports an extra (and extra wide) belt to go over his armor. The belts are made of thin leather-like material with affixed and embossed metal plaques -- this works better in theory than in practice (see below). The auxiliary has a short spear or javelin (lancea) with attachable spearhead -- which also works better in theory than in practice (see the photo in the Paint category above). He has also been given two Gallic-type wrist torques. The legionary comes with a coiled rope and with three interchangeable shanks of varying lengths and weights for his javelin (pilum).

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri1110

The legionary set comes with metal Roman numerals which you can use to affix a legion number of your choice to the appropriate "field" on the shield. You will need glue and possibly a coat of paint or dull finish (I have not yet applied the latter). This set also comes with additional pendants that could be attached to the ends of the danglers, but that seemed too fragile and too much trouble for me to affix.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri1210

I am subtracting a star from this category because of the overly fragile or flimsy attachment of many of the elements, a source of much annoyance: see below.

Outfit - 3.5/4 stars

The centurion wears a red tunic, a leather-like jerkin (subarmalis) with two rows of pendant straps (pteryges) at both the bottom and the shoulders, and a muscled cuirass (whether it is intended to represent one made of leather or bronze is not specified -- although the color appears far too dark for ancient bronze). He also has red-brown pants (feminalia) reaching down to the upper calf and his lower legs can be protected by greaves (ocrae). On his feet he wears closed boots (calcei) with silverish hobnails. His lower neck is protected from the armor by a red military scarf (focale), and a heavy velvet-like red cloak hangs rather loosely from specially designated holes in the muscle cuirass. He has a metal Gallic Type E helmet with an attachable transverse crest. Apart from perpetuating the simplistic notion that the Romans employed red consistently or uniformly for such items as the military tunics, the choice of pants for a figure representing typical 1st century AD military personnel is somewhat surprising -- they are generally agreed to have come into common use late in that century, closer to the Year 100.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0710

The legionary wears a red tunic, leather-like armor, knee-length light brown pants (feminalia), military boots (caligae) with silverish hobnails, leather-like wrist bands protecting the lower arms. His neck is protected by the red military scarf (focale) and he has a red hooded cloak to wear. His metal helmet is of the Coolus Type G, with a beige plume. The leather armor and wrist bands are of debatable historical accuracy. Generally, discrete wrist guards are not believed to have been part of typical legionary armament, and are common only among archers. The evidence for leather armor as anything more than an underarmor jerkin is particularly contentious. The promotional materials indicate that the leather armor that comes with this set is based on a drawing in Robert von Spalart book on historical costume (from 1798). Although not everything dated is necessarily wrong, that does not carry much weight with military historians today, and most interpretations based on pictorial or sculptural evidence are open to debate. Allegedly fragments of Roman leather armor have been found in Egypt, and Raffaele d'Amato's Roman Army Units in the Eastern Provinces 31 BC-AD 195 does include an illustration of banded leather armor worn by a city guard (not a legionary), citing pictorial evidence from an Egyptian linen shroud and from Anatolian monuments. Using "chain" mail would have been a considerably less controversial and more convincing choice; the use of pants is also possibly questionable, as they became more common late in the 1st century (as noted above).

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0910

The auxiliary wears a red tunic, molded rubber "chain" mail with short sleeves and additional leather-lined "chain" mail shoulder guards (giving the armor the overall impression of a Greek linothorax), and . He had brown long pants (braccae), with his calves additionally protected by leg wrappings. He has been given Gallic closed sandals without hobnails, although it is likely that many or most infantry auxiliaries would have worn typical military boots (caligae). I suppose there is something to be said for variety. The pants (though more typically of the shorter type, feminalia) are less questionable here, as they appear to have come into common use among auxiliaries earlier than among legionaries, by the mid-1st century. This would have been especially true in the northern provinces along the upper Danube and the Rhine, and in Britain. The auxiliary sports a metal Coolus Type C helmet without a plume or crest.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0210

Fun Factor - 3/4 stars

With four different contemporary figures produced at the same time, not to mention any of Kaustic Plastik's earlier Roman releases (gladiators and military alike), the fun factor for these products should skyrocket. Historically debatable choices aside, the attention to detail is commendable, as is the range of options we get at once and over time. What hurts these products in this category is the common issue of limited poseability (due to overly loose joints) and the flimsiness of a number of articles that break repeatedly with minimal handling (more on that below) -- which makes posing these figures a frustrating rather than fun experience. On the other hand, if you just want to stick them on the provided figure stands and forget about them on a shelf, that frustration largely disappears.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0610

Value - 3/4 stars

Retailing at about $140-160 (USD), these are not particularly expensive for high-end action figures these days (something relative, of course). Given the research, care, and large number of fine accessories that come with these sets, I would have given this category a full 4 stars had it not been for the frustrating issues mentioned above.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpri0410

Things to watch out for

A lot. With all the layers of clothing and armor (including helmets), accessories (weapons and shileds), your figure could get relatively top heavy, easily lose balance, and topple over. In fact, given the loose ankle and knee joints, it might fall over even sooner. The many and intricate tiny details are not likely to hold up well if the figure fell from any considerable height, and many of the items are fragile or flimsily attached. I lost count of how many times I had to use super glue on something that came loose, including the plaques on the belts, and what seems like half a dozen buckles. One of the auxiliary's wrist torques snapped in two. The auxiliary's spear head and the legionary's pilum shanks do not attach very well, making them look limp and fall out easily. While they are not likely to break easily, they are likely to get lost or to stab you should you tread on them. And all this fresh out of the box, with minimal and careful handling. (The centurion's crest came badly misshapen and required some water treatment, and now looks like the sonic hedgehog...)

Overall - 3/4 stars

What should have been a set of great products has turned out to be a set of pretty good products. There is a lot here that can be appreciated, enjoyed, and possibly improved with little effort. And a lot that adds to existing or future collections. Box imagery apart, what you see in the promotional images is exactly what you get, at a fairly reasonable price for our times. But there are far too many small annoyances to make these perfect products.

For some kitbashes based largely on these sets, see HERE. Sample photo below.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Kpr0410

What do you think?

Where to Buy

Various options, including eBay sellers, for example these:

Big Bad Toy Store

Cotswold Collectibles

Timewalker Toys


#kausticplastik #kp #rome #romanempire #legions #military #historical #ancient #male


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
I love the level of detail but the "auxilliary" is the closest to being historically accurate. Ditch the trousers and shoes, get him a rectangular shield, and paint his helmet gold, and he is very close to a Republican legionary. Both kitbashes in your last photo are very good - just have to paint their helmets.


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

scalawag

scalawag
Another great review GubernatorFan.

I think these look ok, and could easily see myself buying at least some of them.

Paul


_________________
I can't see the trees for the Forest
military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review Yv5cCVM

skywalkersaga

skywalkersaga
Thanks for this excellent review, GF! While some aspects of these figures may be a bit frustrating, it seems the kitbash potential alone makes them well worth it.


_________________
"The happy ending of the fairy tale, the myth, and the divine comedy of the soul, is to be read,
not as a contradiction, but as a transcendence of the universal tragedy of man."

Focusing on the Prequels, Clone Wars, and Original Trilogy eras (NO 'sequels', thanks!)
https://the-far-bright-center.tumblr.com/

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
shazzdan wrote:I love the level of detail but the "auxilliary" is the closest to being historically accurate. Ditch the trousers and shoes, get him a rectangular shield, and paint his helmet gold, and he is very close to a Republican legionary. Both kitbashes in your last photo are very good - just have to paint their helmets.

That is a nice way of summing it up -- they do make a lot of great stuff, though they do not always put it together in an ideal way, but then we can customize. I also felt the auxiliary is the least questionable reconstruction, although this particular type of "chain" mail seems to be better established for Late Republican and Julio-Claudian legionaries (the one I used for my kitbashed auxiliary came from the cavalryman figure). I suppose that explains your recommendation for how to turn this into a 1st century BC legionary -- which is indeed largely what I did for my kitbash. The leg bindings and probably the pants would have to go -- especially for a legionary but not necessarily for an auxiliary (1st century AD). When you say ditch the shoes, do you mean change them to normal caligae (which would have been my instinct, whether for a legionary or auxiliary)? Ideally he'd also need a focale scarf.

I wonder what you think of the centurion figure. Would a repaint of the greaves and especially the muscle cuirass (to establish it as metal rather than leather) improve it? Oh yes, and maybe ditching the pants... Smile

I also remember your comment on the kitbashes (and thank you) -- though I still wonder how well my acrylics will bind on metal or how easily they would chip away.

scalawag wrote:Another great review GubernatorFan. I think these look ok, and could easily see myself buying at least some of them.

Thank you Paul. Well, I am not specifically trying to sell them, but glad you liked them too. With my interests, I couldn't pass on them, even the ones I realized would need fixing to be more accurate or less questionable. But for the purposes of the review, I showed them as they were intended by Kaustic Plastik.

skywalkersaga wrote:Thanks for this excellent review, GF! While some aspects of these figures may be a bit frustrating, it seems the kitbash potential alone makes them well worth it.

Thank you very much. I hope I didn't sound too annoyed or bitter, but it was very frustrating -- all the more so as I thought I expected trouble and went about it carefully to minimize it and met with frustrations despite these efforts. But yes, even the flawed figures can be modified and the sets are a goldmine for kitbashes, much like CooModel's fantasy Vikings (which I reviewed HERE).


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
Yeah, ditch the shoes and give him caligae. Not sure the focale was worn much in Republican armies. Its main purpose seems to have been to stop segmentata from chafing the neck. Don't rely on D'Amato, his research methodology is a century out of date. Mike Bishop is the best source for segmentata research. Connolly's drawing is a good one to base a Republican legionary on.

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review NZKyUCH


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
shazzdan wrote:Yeah, ditch the shoes and give him caligae. Not sure the focale was worn much in Republican armies. Its main purpose seems to have been to stop segmentata from chafing the neck. Connolly's drawing is a good one to base it on.

Hmm, then it would be strange indeed that KP gave their leather-armored legionary a focale. The Conolly image corresponds pretty closely to the old Phil Barker/Ian Heath drawing of an Augustan legionary (The Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome, p. 61, no. 2). They also give him no focale, though they provide one for their next legionary, "early 1st century A.D.," which has been given a different shield and pteryges at the shoulders and the bottom (ibid., p. 62, no. 3). On the other hand Osprey's The Roman Army from Caesar and Trajan (by Simkins/Embleton) seems to show the focale as standard legionary equipment, worn with both mail and lorica segmentata, and a photo of the Roman Cancellaria relief within the book (p. 8 ) seems to indicate that it was worn even without armor. The newer Osprey books on the Roman army units in the western and eastern provinces by your "friend" D'Amato (illustrated by Ruggeri) do generally reserve the focale for the lorica segmentata, though they do provide a couple of exceptions, with mail-clad cavalryman (west) and archer (east).


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
The leather edging long the shoulder-doubling stops mail from chafing the neck. No need for a focale. A regular mail shirt doesn't need a focale because it doesn't touch the neck. The hole has to be large enough to get the head through, which leaves plenty of clearance for the neck.


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

skywalkersaga

skywalkersaga
Well. from a purely shallow fashion perspective, I like the focale... looks nice. ;D


_________________
"The happy ending of the fairy tale, the myth, and the divine comedy of the soul, is to be read,
not as a contradiction, but as a transcendence of the universal tragedy of man."

Focusing on the Prequels, Clone Wars, and Original Trilogy eras (NO 'sequels', thanks!)
https://the-far-bright-center.tumblr.com/

Stryker2011

Stryker2011
Founding Father
Thanks for a thorough and detailed review. I’m glad I never got into these guys, all the flaws, loose joints, and most of all detailed instructions would drive me nuts. “Historical inaccuracies” aside, let’s remember that 90% of the records from this time period have been lost due to time and the destruction of wars. I don’t follow any ”Historian” blindly, as they are all making assumptions based on the limited resources available, and very little can be taken as true FACT. Until someone invents a time machine, it’s all supposition, so I wouldn’t sweat the details too much, unless you want to go with today’s “best guesser” (ie, Historian) and make your figures look like what they believe to be “truth”.


_________________
Mark

He who dies with the most toys wins!

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review TCFITBi

shazzdan

shazzdan
If you only have pictorial evidence then I agree that any conclusions are nothing more than supposition. But if you also have textual and archaeological evidence then conclusions are far more definite. We have enough of all three types of evidence to have a good idea of what a Roman legionary from the late Republican or the Imperial periods used in battle. It doesn't include any kind of leather armour.

There are only two extant examples of leather armour dating to the Roman period and they are both scale/lamellar. One was found at Dura Europos in Syria and the other found at Karanis in Egypt. Since both are Middle Eastern provinces we don't even know whether they were worn by Romans. The only leather "armour" found in a Roman context is some protective gear worn by a charioteer in the hippodrome.


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
shazzdan wrote:The leather edging long the shoulder-doubling stops mail from chafing the neck. No need for a focale. A regular mail shirt doesn't need a focale because it doesn't touch the neck. The hole has to be large enough to get the head through, which leaves plenty of clearance for the neck.

skywalkersaga wrote:Well. from a purely shallow fashion perspective, I like the focale... looks nice. ;D

I think that's partly the point -- rationalization of necessity alone cannot be used to determine actual practice. Just off the top of my head, for example, were plumed/haired crests a necessity?

Stryker2011 wrote:Thanks for a thorough and detailed review. I’m glad I never got into these guys, all the flaws, loose joints, and most of all detailed instructions would drive me nuts. “Historical inaccuracies” aside, let’s remember that 90% of the records from this time period have been lost due to time and the destruction of wars. I don’t follow any ”Historian” blindly, as they are all making assumptions based on the limited resources available, and very little can be taken as true FACT. Until someone invents a time machine, it’s all supposition, so I wouldn’t sweat the details too much, unless you want to go with today’s “best guesser” (ie, Historian) and make your figures look like what they believe to be “truth”.

Welcome. By the way, there were no detailed instructions, which was actually a drawback. I find your lack of faith in historians disturbing. Smile There is something to be said for training and experience in the evaluation of sources, but inference does not always equal fact (at least not demonstrably) and should be admitted as such. In other words, it is best to proceed with caution.

shazzdan wrote:If you only have pictorial evidence then I agree that any conclusions are nothing more than supposition. But if you also have textual and archaeological evidence then conclusions are far more definite. We have enough of all three types of evidence to have a good idea of what a Roman legionary from the late Republican or the Imperial periods used in battle. It doesn't include any kind of leather armour.

There are only two extant examples of leather armour dating to the Roman period and they are both scale/lamellar. One was found at Dura Europos in Syria and the other found at Karanis in Egypt. Since both are Middle Eastern provinces we don't even know whether they were worn by Romans. The only leather "armour" found in a Roman context is some protective gear worn by a charioteer in the hippodrome.

I do agree with most of your objections to KP's choices and I agree that actual finds in an archaeological context are most valuable -- both in themselves, and in making sense of the pictorial, sculptural, and written evidence. That said, as you know full well, there isn't enough that survives for a full picture; making the said pictorial, sculptural, and written evidence inevitably necessary and relevant, subject to the caveats of caution and interpretation. Leather, which does not "keep" as well as metal in archaeological contexts (with some exceptions mostly found in special environments), is a fine example of this. Very little of it survives, often just mineralized fragments on the surface of metal fittings, etc. The fact that the surviving fragments interpreted as leather armor were found in Egypt and Syria is telling -- in both cases a desert environment that might dry and preserve what would otherwise disintegrate. This does not of course prove any massive or widespread use of leather armor, but it is not completely insignificant. There are issues with your definitions of "Romans" and "Roman context." This was a Roman Empire, these were Roman troops (without necessarily being descended from Romans proper or even Italians), serving a Roman government and command structure; if auxiliaries they became Roman citizens upon retirement; if legionaries they started as citizens; after 212 all free men were citizens. One can and should make a distinction between the equipment practices of different periods, different places, and different services (legionaries, auxiliaries, central armies, frontier troops, federates, etc) -- and there has been a shift in that direction as of late -- but surely all these variations fall within the scope of the Roman military.


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
We have literally tons of Roman leather artifacts: shoes, tents, shield covers, belts, straps, even fittings for metal armour. There were over four hundred shoes found just at one site (Vindolanda). Leather armour proponents can't explain how all of this leather survived but none of the leather armour did; especially since they believe that Roman leather armour was more widespread than Roman metal armour.


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

skywalkersaga

skywalkersaga

GubernatorFan wrote:I think that's partly the point -- rationalization of necessity alone cannot be used to determine actual practice. Just off the top of my head, for example, were plumed/haired crests a necessity?




Yeah, I know what you mean. Also, I feel like something like a 'scarf' ALWAYS has a practical purpose, even if the one that it was originally intended for -- to act as padding from chafing -- has been rendered obsolete for some reason. It can be used to keep one's neck warm in chilly weather, or to collect sweat in warmer situations. And depending on who is wearing it, and when, it can even be some kind of identifier from a distance. Similar to the crest on a helmet.


_________________
"The happy ending of the fairy tale, the myth, and the divine comedy of the soul, is to be read,
not as a contradiction, but as a transcendence of the universal tragedy of man."

Focusing on the Prequels, Clone Wars, and Original Trilogy eras (NO 'sequels', thanks!)
https://the-far-bright-center.tumblr.com/

shazzdan

shazzdan
The focale is said by some to to be the precursor to the cravat.


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

skywalkersaga

skywalkersaga
Then the thought of it as a decorative/fashion item is perhaps not so far off.... ;D


_________________
"The happy ending of the fairy tale, the myth, and the divine comedy of the soul, is to be read,
not as a contradiction, but as a transcendence of the universal tragedy of man."

Focusing on the Prequels, Clone Wars, and Original Trilogy eras (NO 'sequels', thanks!)
https://the-far-bright-center.tumblr.com/

Stryker2011

Stryker2011
Founding Father
Yeah, sorry, "No instructions" is what I meant. I would never be able to assemble one of these guys without that. Hell, I often have to refer to all the PO pictures just to assemble some of the TBLeague figures, and they used to include instructions; I miss that.


_________________
Mark

He who dies with the most toys wins!

military - Roman Infantry 2019 Kaustic Plastik Review TCFITBi

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
shazzdan wrote:We have literally tons of Roman leather artifacts: shoes, tents, shield covers, belts, straps, even fittings for metal armour. There were over four hundred shoes found just at one site (Vindolanda). Leather armour proponents can't explain how all of this leather survived but none of the leather armour did; especially since they believe that Roman leather armour was more widespread than Roman metal armour.

That's why I also think the case for any truly widespread use of leather armor is overstated, and that some are overly eager to identify it in paintings and sculptures that can be interpreted in a more conventional manner (i.e., as metal armor).

skywalkersaga wrote:Yeah, I know what you mean. Also, I feel like something like a 'scarf' ALWAYS has a practical purpose, even if the one that it was originally intended for -- to act as padding from chafing -- has been rendered obsolete for some reason. It can be used to keep one's neck warm in chilly weather, or to collect sweat in warmer situations. And depending on who is wearing it, and when, it can even be some kind of identifier from a distance. Similar to the crest on a helmet.

Agreed, and also remember as a status symbol. If (for example!) the focale had become a standard part of legionary equipment for (let's say) practical reasons, it might have been retained as an item associated with the higher status of legionary troops even after these practical reasons disappeared. Of course, here we have actually "chain" mail followed by lorica segmentata, followed by "chain" or scale mail, and supposedly only the middle stage requires it -- I bring this up, because the question is whether this item would have been in much use this early (the figures we've been discussing are before the lorica segmentata period). But before the "chain" mail there would have been Greek-type cuirasses, some of which would have been of metal plate, so to speak, and these might have benefited from the use of a focale too. Anyway, by now we're deep in hypothetical territory, and we've been using plenty of generalization.

shazzdan wrote:The focale is said by some to to be the precursor to the cravat.

This would seem plausible enough, although there is surely a long gap in usage -- then again the Renaissance resurrected plenty of at least artistic representations of Greco-Roman tradition and life sometimes imitates art.

Stryker2011 wrote:Yeah, sorry, "No instructions" is what I meant. I would never be able to assemble one of these guys without that. Hell, I often have to refer to all the PO pictures just to assemble some of the TBLeague figures, and they used to include instructions; I miss that.

I thought maybe that's what you meant after all. I have often had to refer to the promotional images for products to figure out what goes where, and sometimes even the larger images we get on the internet are not quite enough -- and on the box here we get them two per side, so fairly small (and only one of each).


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
If a suit of armour was made in an Egyptian style by an Egyptian armourer in an Egyptian workshop and worn by an Egyptian soldier, but in a Roman army, is the armour Roman or Egyptian?


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
shazzdan wrote:If a suit of armour was made in an Egyptian style by an Egyptian armourer in an Egyptian workshop and worn by an Egyptian soldier, but in a Roman army, is the armour Roman or Egyptian?

Why do you assume it is Egyptian style? And even if it were, the Romans adopted numerous parts of their equipment from other people they had encountered and often conquered -- most notably the Gauls (with Gallic-type helmets and shields -- and those were at one time or another in standard use by Roman troops).


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
GubernatorFan wrote:
shazzdan wrote:If a suit of armour was made in an Egyptian style by an Egyptian armourer in an Egyptian workshop and worn by an Egyptian soldier, but in a Roman army, is the armour Roman or Egyptian?

Why do you assume it is Egyptian style? And even if it were, the Romans adopted numerous parts of their equipment from other people they had encountered and often conquered -- most notably the Gauls (with Gallic-type helmets and shields -- and those were at one time or another in standard use by Roman troops).

The Karanis armour was definitely Egyptian style. Egyptian scale armour hadn't changed since the Bronze Age. It is virtually identical to the one that Carter found in Tut's tomb.
http://exhibitions.kelsey.lsa.umich.edu/ConAntiq/leatherarmor.html

My question is where do we draw the line? When does it stop being Egyptian and start being Roman?


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
shazzdan wrote:The Karanis armour was definitely Egyptian style. Egyptian scale armour hadn't changed since the Bronze Age. It is virtually identical to the one that Carter found in Tut's tomb.
http://exhibitions.kelsey.lsa.umich.edu/ConAntiq/leatherarmor.html

My question is where do we draw the line? When does it stop being Egyptian and start being Roman?

It's a very good question, and I am not quite sure we can draw a line. If Roman units adopted this in any number (as opposed to -- say -- some local city guards), I suppose it would make it Roman. Thanks for the link, I had never seen the Karanis armor before (which is a shame, since I've been to the Kelsey more than once), and assumed it was strap armor, a bit like lorica segmentata rather than scale armor like the squamata. It does look pretty close to the Bronze Age depictions and remains, although those were in metal -- the ones I've seen anyway.


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

shazzdan

shazzdan
The one that Carter found was made from hide, just like the Karannis one. The Tut corselet is the oldest known example of hide armour.


_________________
More of my work can be found at One Sixth Arsenal
https://www.etsy.com/au/shop/OneSixthArsenal

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
You're right about the armor from Tutankhamun's tomb. The metal ones are from elsewhere.


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

Ephiane

Ephiane
Great Review, thanks for showing !


Stryker2011 wrote:Thanks for a thorough and detailed review. I’m glad I never got into these guys, all the flaws, loose joints, and most of all detailed instructions would drive me nuts. “Historical inaccuracies” aside, let’s remember that 90% of the records from this time period have been lost due to time and the destruction of wars. I don’t follow any ”Historian” blindly, as they are all making assumptions based on the limited resources available, and very little can be taken as true FACT. Until someone invents a time machine, it’s all supposition, so I wouldn’t sweat the details too much, unless you want to go with today’s “best guesser” (ie, Historian) and make your figures look like what they believe to be “truth”.


Amen Wink

GubernatorFan

GubernatorFan
Founding Father
Ephiane wrote:Great Review, thanks for showing !

Thanks, Ephiane, glad you liked it.


_________________
I'll be back!
http://onesixthfigures.forumotion.com

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum