NEW PRODUCT: HH Model x HaoYuTOYS Joint Launch: 1/6 Imperial Legion - Eagle Flag/Aquilifer Motif

really nice looking figure. I missed out on the 1st 2 due to lack of cash, but still hoping to pick them up. Will pick this up too. Won't comment on anything about historical as lot of farbies around lol

Fair enough I stand corrected.

Paul

Definitely gonna grab that head for a custom Ser Davos!!!

The set is beautiful, a chance I don't collect that era because I would build an army and conquer Europe (again lol)

As for the historical accuracy, I don't want to throw water on hot stones but sorry @shazzdan there are some evidences of use of bracers or forearms protections in the roman army (dunno where you got that they were never ever used in the whole roman history lol)

While not a part of the regular gear at first, the manica is the most famous example of arm protection used in the roman army, its origin is gaulish though, and it was used by gladiators at first. it consists in bent plates of iron which cover the foream, or the full arm, sometimes even up to the shoulder head. The roman army lately used the shorter version called "lorica manica" which was an extension of the "lorica segmentata", the common chest armor.

Evidence of the use of these manica can be found on various legionaries tombstones which used to be engraved and decorated with sculptures of their armors and weapons. The most famous being Sextus Valerus Severus, and Gaius Annius Salutus.

Out of the military, leather straps, wrists bands, and such were and still are commonly used by stone, iron, or wood craftmen, butchers, wrestlers, athletes... In fact their use became less common in some works done by slaves during the roman era. But there are evidences of use of leather straps and wrist bands from before the roman era (the egyptians come to my mind first)

Anyway sorry for the digression, while I'm not a military expert at all, a youth of reading "Asterix n Obelix" made me a fan of that historic period, got some good books from my grandparents covering the roman era quite well

blackpool wrote:As for the historical accuracy, I don't want to throw water on hot stones but sorry @shazzdan there are some evidences of use of bracers or forearms protections in the roman army (dunno where you got that they were never ever used in the whole roman history lol)

While not a part of the regular gear at first, the manica is the most famous example of arm protection used in the roman army, its origin is gaulish though, and it was used by gladiators at first. it consists in bent plates of iron which cover the foream, or the full arm, sometimes even up to the shoulder head. The roman army lately used the shorter version called "lorica manica" which was an extension of the "lorica segmentata", the common chest armor.

What does a segmented manica have to do with these Hollywood leather wrist bracers?

blackpool wrote:As for the historical accuracy, I don't want to throw water on hot stones but sorry @shazzdan there are some evidences of use of bracers or forearms protections in the roman army (dunno where you got that they were never ever used in the whole roman history lol)

While not a part of the regular gear at first, the manica is the most famous example of arm protection used in the roman army, its origin is gaulish though, and it was used by gladiators at first. it consists in bent plates of iron which cover the foream, or the full arm, sometimes even up to the shoulder head. The roman army lately used the shorter version called "lorica manica" which was an extension of the "lorica segmentata", the common chest armor.

Evidence of the use of these manica can be found on various legionaries tombstones which used to be engraved and decorated with sculptures of their armors and weapons. The most famous being Sextus Valerus Severus, and Gaius Annius Salutus.

Out of the military, leather straps, wrists bands, and such were and still are commonly used by stone, iron, or wood craftmen, butchers, wrestlers, athletes... In fact their use became less common in some works done by slaves during the roman era. But there are evidences of use of leather straps and wrist bands from before the roman era (the egyptians come to my mind first)

You are right about use outside the military, and if you include archers, you would be right about the use of leather bracers in the Roman military. The non-Roman use isn't really the point here (and the supposed Egyptian arm defenses may have been elaborations of decorative bracelets anyway -- though I'd have to double check), nor is this anything like the manica proper, which is a sleeve covering the whole arm and carrying armored metal segments -- but this is not a manica. You can scroll up and read for more details, but basically none of the evidence that is available and none of the serious published reconstructions that I am aware of (and apparently shazzdan) gives such lower arm bracers to legionaries in general or aquilifers in particular. I really do think they tried to make the figure more interesting and the outfit more complex by adding the bracers and the shin guards to it -- they certainly look cooler than the bracelets or torques they might have actually worn. The good thing is, as I suggested above, that it is a cool figure and can be very easily modified to achieve accuracy -- if one wishes to do so -- by removing any offending and inaccurate pieces of equipment.

Well, it may not be historically accurate, but as someone whose been involved in a couple of fights where my adversary had a knife -- and trust me, I don't care how good of a fighter you are, you get in a knife fight -- you're going to get cut -- I find them to be highly practical. The wrist is one of the most vulnerable spots on the human body, and I've seen guys bleed out (mostly due to adrenaline) that had no idea they were even hurt until it's too late. Wearing bracers would be one of the most common sense things a guy fighting with sharp, pokey things going up against a guy with sharp, pokey things could do.

As someone who follows "literary" history, and who has a collection of the writings of the Ancients, most literary scholars admit that we have only a tiny fraction of the writings of Caesar, Cicero, Plato, Aristotle, Homer, etc., so to suggest that we have every piece of written information from the age of Ancient Rome about what Roman soldiers did or did not wear is highly unlikely and suspect. Just my two cents.

shazzdan wrote:
What does a segmented manica have to do with these Hollywood leather wrist bracers?

GubernatorFan wrote:
You are right about use outside the military, and if you include archers, you would be right about the use of leather bracers in the Roman military. The non-Roman use isn't really the point here (and the supposed Egyptian arm defenses may have been elaborations of decorative bracelets anyway -- though I'd have to double check), nor is this anything like the manica proper, which is a sleeve covering the whole arm and carrying armored metal segments -- but this is not a manica. You can scroll up and read for more details, but basically none of the evidence that is available and none of the serious published reconstructions that I am aware of (and apparently shazzdan) gives such lower arm bracers to legionaries in general or aquilifers in particular. I really do think they tried to make the figure more interesting and the outfit more complex by adding the bracers and the shin guards to it -- they certainly look cooler than the bracelets or torques they might have actually worn. The good thing is, as I suggested above, that it is a cool figure and can be very easily modified to achieve accuracy -- if one wishes to do so -- by removing any offending and inaccurate pieces of equipment.

I'm just pointing that arm protections were indeed in use in the roman army, the manica being the most iconic as part of the "lorica segmentata" armor. And since all troops weren't equiped with a full armor it's highly probable that legionaries found other ways to protect their wrists, may it be ironmonger/carpenter/butcher/gladiator bracers, clothes or leather wrist bands...

While I agree with you that the decorative aspect might be fantasy, legionnaries had some accessories like extra padding, leather straps, mainly to maintain their armor, belt, and boots, and surely used them as wrist protection (just like soldiers these days) Reason why I wouldn't call for historical inaccuracy on this point, once again, wielding a sword and using a pilum all day, the chances are high that every soldier had personal ways to protect their hands and wrists both to prevent from breaking and to maintain them in the axis of the hand (just as they had variants of the caliglae boots depending on the climate and conditions).

Stryker and blackpool: Out of my respect and affection to you both I will not argue further in this thread, apart from just pointing out that despite some leeway in the interpretation of the evidence, there is copious written, pictorial, and archaeological evidence for the equipment of the Roman army and especially the legions; this purports to be a legionary standard bearer and is marketed as such. It is not marketed as an ancient-like fantasy warrior or a hypothetical what-might-make-sense warrior (I agree that it does make sense to protect one's wrists and lower arms, but note shazzdan's comment about the actual practicality of bracers and also remember that these troops are intended to be deployed in close formation, with each soldier's shield overlapping the under-protected side of the next, etc). That is why some of us find it natural and appropriate to comment on the unfounded choices that have been made in equipping this figure. But, again, one can modify the figure to one's tastes, if one so chooses to do.

What made sense to them does not always make sense to us. Protective wrist bracers are surprisingly rare in all martial cultures, not just Rome. IMO they didn't use them because they weren't practical. If one slips on your wrist at the wrong moment, you are dead.

For gods sakes people, if you don't like the arm braces when you buy it leave them off, and if you do like them leave them on.
For the love of mike it's a plastic doll, not a treatise on the dress of a Roman Standard bearer.

Paul

scalawag wrote:For gods sakes people, if you don't like the arm braces when you buy it leave them off, and if you do like them leave them on.
For the love of mike it's a plastic doll, not a treatise on the dress of a Roman Standard bearer.

Paul

that's why I stayed out the debate on that...nicely said

I knew I shouldn't have replied when I read the "never ever in their whole history"... You can't talk with omniscient historians... humble bow to your absolute certainty and knowledge guys

It is no different to the modern military figures on the market. Collectors pay a premium for accuracy and rightly complain if they are not. If these figures aren't accurate then the sellers have no right to be charging these kinds of prices.

being accurate to contemporary military is one thing, being accurate from what we think we know about the roman military 2000 years ago, that's another thing... But you proved you know it all bro

blackpool wrote:being accurate to contemporary military is one thing, being accurate from what we think we know about the roman military 2000 years ago, that's another thing... But you proved you know it all bro

Exactly!

And the 'inaccuracy' so hotly debated here is an accessory that you could quite happily leave off the damn doll if you want to because you think it is not authentic.
I do collect some modern military figures too, and yes they sometimes have inaccuracies in gear and equipment, but if that's the case and I can't just live with it then I source a new more accurate part where one is available or leave it off if its an extra as in this case clearly it is.  I don't think I have ever bought a figure I thought was 100% how it should be (according to me) out of the box and I doubt I ever will.  They are sold as 'collectables' not reference pieces.

Manufacturers claim that their figures are something they are not sometimes out of their own ignorance, and sometimes knowing that some collectors simply won't know they are inaccurate and others won't care so much, and so they will still make sales regardless.
The prices of figures in my opinion have more to do with the profit margins than they are a reflection of the accuracy.
 
I doubt that many manufacturers read forums like this one, and so arguments here are not likely to change their mind.  If you feel that strongly about it I would suggest writing to the manufacturers directly with your concerns.

I am really sure that this does not deserve this level of debate on a forum like this.  

If you have stated your view and someone disagrees with it they are not disrespecting your beliefs.  They are simply choosing to believe something else.  Just leave it at that and move on for goodness sake.  
If they choose not to believe you and you are 'right' then that is their loss surely.  
If you continue to argue and try to change their mind then you stand a good chance of coming off looking like the bad guy to the observer and thats then your loss.  

In the past I used to argue my points a lot more than I do these days, but at some point I realised I was looking like a complete dick to other people when I did it, that I rarely achieved the goal of changing others minds or making them accept that I was 'right' and that it puts off others from ever contributing things, things which I might actually learn from, as they are too scared to bring them up.

If someone doesn't  agree with you or believe what you say it's no real biggy, just let them believe something else.

Paul

Well said @Scalawag

Well said, Paul.