05-14-2007, 06:46 PM
My view is that, if a muscle-cuirass were made out of leather, it wouldn't be very flexible, since it would have been treated (probably by the cuir-bouille method) to stiffen it and improve its defensive qualities. Therefore, you could paint it. These chaps painted metal helmets which were going to be attracting the attention of loads of spear- and javelin-points, sword edges, slingshot and arrows - and they painted them in elaborate patterns.
I have no idea how they made paints that would work on metal, but, if the statuary and pottery evidence is to be believed, they did it. Why would they have any problems with painting metal, leather or linen cuirasses?
I'm not convinced that a thorax necessarily endures more rough treatment than a helmet.
What I'm really getting at here is that colour on armour is an unreliable indicator of the material of the armour.
I have no idea how they made paints that would work on metal, but, if the statuary and pottery evidence is to be believed, they did it. Why would they have any problems with painting metal, leather or linen cuirasses?
I'm not convinced that a thorax necessarily endures more rough treatment than a helmet.
What I'm really getting at here is that colour on armour is an unreliable indicator of the material of the armour.
