07-22-2011, 07:12 PM
I'm coming late to this, but of course, Richard, it's always a matter of period. In the Archaic, whether in Sparta or elsewhere, there's some evidence of shoulder and upper arm armour. Most of the Black figure vases (Attic, of course) show heroes in what might be called "cap-a-pied" with greaves, thigh armour, arm harness, (at least rerebraces) and what appears ot be a shoulder protection.
Many of these pieces have actually been recovered, but (I believe) only in an Italian context--etrusca and Sicilian finds seem to to include pauldrons, rerebraces, and thigh armour, as well as (I think I have this right) a full foot plate to cover the sandaled foot. I'm pretty sure the find books from Olympia also include at least one pauldron. Mycopy is out on loan.
I've heard it argued that the illustration in black figure are heroes and gods, not real men--that may be the case, but the existence of such items of armour rather suggests that senior aristocrats probably had full harness. Why NOT the king of Sparta?
But then, to be fair, I could also argue that the ethic of Sparta might motivate against having more armour than the others...hard to tell.
Many of these pieces have actually been recovered, but (I believe) only in an Italian context--etrusca and Sicilian finds seem to to include pauldrons, rerebraces, and thigh armour, as well as (I think I have this right) a full foot plate to cover the sandaled foot. I'm pretty sure the find books from Olympia also include at least one pauldron. Mycopy is out on loan.
I've heard it argued that the illustration in black figure are heroes and gods, not real men--that may be the case, but the existence of such items of armour rather suggests that senior aristocrats probably had full harness. Why NOT the king of Sparta?
But then, to be fair, I could also argue that the ethic of Sparta might motivate against having more armour than the others...hard to tell.
Qui plus fait, miex vault.
