All of the following images of the musculata are mine and are copyright free and free to use.

Please, link to them or save them, use them as wallpaper, or photoshop your heads on to them, I don't care. The intellectual property rights of today are totally inadequate and we aren't going to learn anything by being so stingy. Just please, host them on your own site, if you are going to use them on your pages, and don't steal my bandwidth. Also give me credit, or not, but send any fellow travelers my way so we can help each other out.

Some are discussed in my essay, "Leather or Bronze". I will be adding to this list as time goes on. If you have any images that would add to this list, please send them on, but I am only looking for images related to the musculata. For resources on the lorica segmentata, hamata or squamata, please look at Matthew Amt's page at Legio XX.

For now the images are organized according to Museum, but I hope to cross-reference them according to themes and motifs.

The commentary contains only selected images that help shed light on the construction, iconography and form of the musculuta, while the thumbnails gallery has all of my images without the commentary.

I hope this helps in the reconstruction efforts of a decent lorica musculata. Good luck!!

Ostia Museum

This first set of images is from the Ostia Museum. There is the famous Ostia Trajan, and another excellent musculata with very good details. In addition there is a bust of Septimus Severus. Both examples show side seams and hinges.

This is a loricata from the period of Trajan & Hadrian (approx. 97 - 135 CE). This example has a very typical form of iconography with thunderbolts on the shoulder harness, a gorgonieon on the breast, Nikes flanking a candelabrum on the abdomen, and river gods on the lower abdomen. This example has evident side seams and hinges, suggesting it was patterned after a real set of armor. The tongue pteruges are very ornate and carry a variety of images. The other pteruges are very dense, with three or more overlapping layers.

This is the famous Ostia Trajan from the Scuola di Traiano in Ostia. The tongue pteruges in this case are very ornate and large, which is unusual, but the rest of the lorica is very conventional for the high empire. The iconography of the cuirass has Nikes astride stags flanking a candelabrum with the gorgoneion on the breast. The cuirass has very clear hinges and side seams. The shoulder harness is eroded but has erotes or putti figures.

This is a bust portrait of Septimus Severus and shows the detail of the shoulder harness and the gorgoneion on the chest.

---

Museo Nazionale Romana Palazzo Massimo alle Terme

The following images are from the Museo Nazionale Romana Palazzo Massimo alle Terme.

This is the famous republican era general with cuirass. The cuirass in this case is indistinguishable from a late hellenistic linothorax.

This is another loricata from the same museum. According to the caption it dates to the Trajanic period, but I have doubts. The large twisted fringes look more like the late Antonine period. Notice especially the ornate decoration on the tongue pteruges. The center image is a lion's head, then flanking it on both sides are eagle's heads in profile, then lion's heads in profile, then bull's heads in profile and so on. On the other side you can make out two more images on the tongue pteurges, patens and mitres, which are roman religious symbols, and a rosette. Notice also the elaborate acanthus on the lower abdomen as well as rose vines. (Anybody thinking of putting roses on THEIR lorica?) The last image provides a view of the cuirass decorations, which are heraldic griffins, which is very common. Notice also that there are NO apparent side seams. This is another reason I think this is an Antonine piece or later. Most of the later loricata have no apparent sides seams. I was having trouble adjusting my camera to the low light. (Flashes are forbidden.) The later images are more accurate.

Yet another loricata from the Palazzo Massimo, also very conventional. Notice the fringe on the paudalaumentum, which unfortunately, covers up many details on the back. This example has Nikes and the candelabrum, also very common, with erotes on the shoulder harnesses. Yet another example with no side seams!! (I'm digging those flowers though.) Pteruges in this case are simple acanthus leaf patterns, yet another variation.

Another loricata from the museum. The griffins with candelabrum is also very common. But notice especially how varied the tongue pteruges are. Here we can see helmets and symbols of the zodiac. Also, there are traces of paint on this example, but it is so oxidized it is hard to tell what color it originally was. This example has a strange groove where the side seams would have been, indicating that perhaps there were side seams, but the image later underwent some modification that has since been removed.

This is the Portanaccio Sarcophagus from the Palazzo Massimo. It's one of many surviving "Battle" Sarcophagi popular during the late Empire. It has a number of military details, but they are probably a little unreliable. Notice the corner trophies though with the parade helmets.

This is an image of Septimus Severus. Excellent gorgonieon, BTW. Notice also the square neck line and the raised neck guard in back. They come in all shapes and sizes but they are generally very subtle, more vestigial than functioning. Following is a diagram of how this looks. The diagram is a little exaggerated to make the point and many lorica musculata do not have the neck guard.

Museo Nazionale Romana Palazzo Altemps

The following images are from the Museo Nazionale Romana Palazzo Altemps.

The first is a heroic nude of Emperor Antoninus Pius. This image is very similar to the Bergama statue in my essay. This is why I believe that the lorica was in fact flexible. Looking at this image it has all the features of a lorica, but it seems utterly unsubstantial. Likewise that Corinthian helmet is making me nervous, but it's original too. That suggests to me that this is more of a symbolic piece, but looking closely it sure looks like a lorica musculata, or maybe we are looking at a subarmalis. Who knows?

This is the famous Ludovisi Sarcophagus, another battle sarcophagus from the Late Period. The following details are interesting, but probably not too trustworthy. These were popular all over the empire, we even find children buried in them, so the artists did not have to be strict in their representation. Great image of the barbarians getting walloped by the Romans though, and it's amazing to see someone carve all the rings in a lorica hamata. Notice also that scales are applied to the lorica musculata by the third century.

The following are a series of bust portraits from the Palazzo Altemps. Unfortunately, these are so heavily restored as to be almost worthless. These are the ones that were 50% or more original. The first two are images of Hadrian and a detail of the gorgoneion, the third is of Septimus Severus. Unfortunately, on these busts, the backs are not carved, so you can't see how the should harness are fastened.

Musei Capitolini

These images are from the Capitoline Hill courtyard.

This is a late statue of Constantine. It has many of the details of the earlier loricata but it lacks any side seams. It does have a very unusual neck guard that even covers the back of the head.

This next set of images are from the Musei Capitolini proper.

The first is from the courtyard of the Capitoline Museum, a trophy relief from the Temple of the Deified Hadrian. Below are a couple of details. It appears to be a very simplified rendition. Following it are my pictures of the personification of a province - a total fantasy piece but just gorgeous details.

Next, two loricae from the same museum, one of Marcus Aurelius, the other of Lucius Verus. The heads are disproportionately small for the figures, suggesting that these figures were not originally intended for images of the Emperor and his brother. The iconography for Marcus Aurelius is all wrong, and he is rarely seen in the equestrian style boots. However, the details of the cuirass are consistent with the Antonine period. Likewise, unlike most of the statuary in the Capitoline collection these have not been extensively restored - even then whoever did restore them should be fired, the hilt on one sword doesn't even line up with the fragment on the shoulder! Some pieces demonstrate calcite build-up and lime erosion, which can't be faked, so these are the genuine articles. Also, these preserve details of the Parazonium or officer's sword, complete with the Eagle headed pommel, and yes those are the original hilts, which look a little bit theatrical to me, but most from this period have that dramatic s-shaped hilt, though not usually that large. It is a ceremonial sword, so it is probably meant to be theatrical. As typical, no hinges or side seams, but lots of fabulous details. One detail I should point out, there is a flap of fabric under the arm on right side that hangs out over the edge of the armhole. It is a feature seen on a lot of loricata. It doesn't appear to be this tunic so I can only surmise it is associated with the subarmalis.

This is a highly restored and questionable loricata from the "Hall of the Captains" in the Capitoline Museum. This one was restored by Gian Lorenzo Bernini, the famous Baroque sculptor and architect, who even put the head of a 17th C. contemporary on it, so it is very suspicious. Ignore the arms and gorgoneion, which are clearly restored, instead look at the cuirass, which looks like an example from the Antonine period. From the wear and tear on the lower part of the cuirass it seems reliable. Notice again, this one has a very simple side seam, and again, that strange fold of material under the arm, which is also original.

Another highly restored loricata of Marcus Aurelius. At least in this instance, the restorer put Marcus Aurelius in the correct shoes. (This is an important and odd feature of Marcus Aurelius' iconography, he always is shown in the more functional everyday cavalry boots, and not the fancier equestrian open-toed boots.) This one shows side seams and hinges, not sure if they are original or not.

Vatican Museum

The following are images from the Vatican collection, which thankfully, allows flash photography.

A highly restored yet beautiful torso from the Vatican collections. It shows the two griffins and the candelabrum very clearly. The scene of a Nike slaying a bull is a fairly typical sacrificial symbol, but it is not often found on the lower abdomen.

Here is the same loricata from the side. Two things to point out; first, the officer's sash and knot, as in many cases pulls in on the material, indicating that the armor is leather or at least a flexible material; secondly, the edge has a complicated treatment of diagonal marks. This almost always identifies stitching in Roman art. It's notable because it even puckers like whip-stitched leather, but the piece dates from the Antonine period, as you can tell by the tell-tale twisted tassles, so there's always a modicum of doubt involved. Lower on the seam you can see a small flap, which I believe to be a leather hinge.

Another photograph of another loricata. In this case look at the side seam. The hinges are present and actually bend around the curves of the anatomy. It is hard to believe that this example is intended to represent bronze, but that is not nearly as revealing as the details on the next example. Notice also the wolf with Romulus and Remus on the lower abdomen, which is more common

Primaporta Augustus

The next is of course is the Primaporta Augustus, found in the house of Livia, c. 14 CE.

The first and foremost thing I would like to comment on is the unbelievable level of detail. You can even count the whip-stitches on his tunic if you cared to. Such a level of detail suggests not only an accomplished artist, but in my opinion, a definite model or models to look at. Likewise, nearly every tassle fringe is individually carved, but look at the detail on the side seam.

There is the tie at top and then four small strap hinges. Unlike the barrel hinges that have a pin securing them, as on a regular door hinge, these are simply straps attaching the two pieces and they simply must be leather since the second from the bottom hinge bends right at the waistline. This would be impossible for a metal hinge, so at least the hinge in this case must be a flexible material. Also, when I first discussed this image in my essay, I argued that this example was most likely not leather. Now I am not so sure. There are many details in the cuirass that suggest that part if not all of it is in fact leather. If my best example of a "bronze" cuirass has irrefutable evidence of the use of leather hinges, I am beginning to wonder what if anything is in fact bronze.

Elsewhere there are some really fabulous details of the pteruges.

Notice the shoulder pteruges in this example. The ends of each individual fringed tassel are clearly discernable.

Another lousy photograph, but you can clearly see three layers of pteruges. Although I can't count the ones on the back of the sculpture, on this one shoulder there are at least 22 individual pteruges. That's well more than double the amount I've seen on any re-enactors kit. The same is true for nearly all of these images. Clearly we need to change this practice.

Side Note: Elsewhere the sculpture reveals many other details, such as the split on the shoulder seam on the sleeves of the tunics. This is common on many sculptures. Also, the fact that we can see individual stitches on the tunic gives us more information on the manufacturing techniques of Roman Clothing. The hems and edges are always shown with a diagonal series of marks that seems to indicate a whip stitch, which is still commonly used to hem garments today. However no stitches appear on the seams where two pieces are joined, indicating that the pieces were stitched on the inside. Now on most of these sculptures, there are a great many creases, folds and pleats to the tunics, indicating a far greater volume of fabric than that found in most re-enactors garb. Now when I started this examination, I thought this was largely artistic license, since the artist would want fabric that would form to the body and demonstrate the contours of the anatomy. However, on second thought I am beginning to have doubts. On the shoulders of many of these pieces the cloth is gathered. Gathering cloth is easy with a simple running stitch, and is a natural product of using a running stitch with a single thread. Since none of the joined seams have visible stitches, I think it may be possible that a running stitch was used.