leather cuirass

[Dan Howard]

If it has no defensive capability then it cannot be defined as "armour". Just because someone wears his shirt to battle doesn't suddenly change it from an item of clothing to a piece of armour.

[Astiryu1]

Unless it were a "Mail" shirt. Descriptive terms can be tricky. I agree that one must define Armour and the best way to do that is looking at a dictionary. The deer skin outfits that the Pathfinders ( ie: Daniel Boone,Davy Crockett, etc. ) wore were not armor but did protect them from thorns, cold, etc.. Protection from what is also something to question. Caligae could be "armor" for the feet if you wanted to say so.

[Dan Howard]

Unless it were a "Mail" shirt. Descriptive terms can be tricky. I agree that one must define Armour and the best way to do that is looking at a dictionary.

Look up "mail" in the dictionary. You have to specifically define your terms before beginning a scholarly discussion. Often a dictionary will contribute to the confusion.

I wouldn't call caligae armour any more than I would call shoes armour. As far as I can tell the studs do little to protect the feet that a solid leather sole can't do, and they actually reduce grip on a hard surface. The main point of the studs seems to be to make the soles last longer before they need replacing (legionaries did a LOT of walking).

[Paullus Scipio]

Dan wrote:

The main point of the studs seems to be to make the soles last longer before they need replacing (legionaries did a LOT of walking).

They also serve to give a better grip in soft, or muddy conditions such as the battlefield, or on the march. It would be a mistake to imagine Roman troops marching everywhere on roads ( they didn't), and in any event almost all Roman major roads were dirt-topped, which was more user friendly for both troops and more importantly unshod beasts of burden.....

[Astiryu1]

In so far as Caligae or any shoe I was meaning to protect the feet, that simple. When I mentioned "Mail shirt" I was referring to the many times it has been referred to as such.

mail (mal) n- armor, especially garments made of or covered with interlocking metal rings, or overlapping metal scales. [ from Old French "maille", from Latin "macula" meaning " a spot; mesh of a net.] Hom- male.--adj.- mailed.

I have proven that I am able to read and have a dictionary in my possession. May I please enter the conversation? As a human with a view point;not as a scholar just to be clear.

I was referring to the "Portraits" much as the statues of Roman leaders functioned. Most portraits and statues I have come across are more "Iconic" than "Photographic" many paintings do have Kings in armor but it is usually on a battlefield.

[Dan Howard]

Mail (mal) n- armor, especially garments made of or covered with interlocking metal rings, or overlapping metal scales. [ from Old French "maille", from Latin "macula" meaning " a spot; mesh of a net.] Hom- male.--adj.- mailed.

This is the problem. As far as armour study goes, "mail" only refers to a mesh of interlinked rings. Dictionaries include other types of armour such as ring armour, and scale armour that should not be referred to as "mail".
I attempted to explain the problems with terminology here.
http://www.arador.com/articles/chainmail.html

[Astiryu1]

Deleted my definitions as they are not conducive to team playing.

Back to leather. I do not suppose that there is any mention in sources of the armor in the photo by "M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER"?

[Matthew Amt]

Unless it were a "Mail" shirt. Descriptive terms can be tricky. I agree that one must define Armour and the best way to do that is looking at a dictionary. The deer skin outfits that the Pathfinders ( ie: Daniel Boone,Davy Crockett, etc. ) wore were not armor but did protect them from thorns, cold, etc.. Protection from what is also something to question. Caligae could be "armor" for the feet if you wanted to say so.

Now, Craig, you're just bantering semantics! Call a bagel a minivan if you like, but...

My definitions will be as followed...

Since you want to converse with an established group, wouldn't it be easier to use the terminology already generally accepted by that group? Rather than have us all adapt to your terms. Particularly since armor enthusiasts around the world are really trying to kill terms like "scale mail"! "Scale" and "mail" are two different things. (Though I for one am not worried if you say mail or maille or even chainmail!)

We are talking about armor as a purpose-made item worn on the body to protect against weapons. We are not including pot holders (e.g.) even if they "protect" the hands against heat... We are also discussing things which appear to *look* like armor but may not have been intended to protect from weapons on their own. Such as that statue above!

Matthew

[Astiryu1]

Can I have the list? My dictionary is apparently inadequate and I would love to get on with it.

[Dan Howard]

Can I have the list? My dictionary is apparently inadequate and I would love to get on with it.

Mail = armour made of a mesh of interlinked rings
Armour = defensive equipment designed to protect the wearer from a weapon
Scale armour = armour made of small overlapping plates attached to a foundation garment
Lamellar armour = small overlapping plates laced or wired together so that no foundation is required.
Ring armour = small rings attached to a foundation; similar to scale except that there is no overlap of the rings. There is no evidence to suggest that it was ever used in medieval Europe.

[Astiryu1]

Thank You!!! This helps immensely now we can talk about the supposed leather cuirass again

[Tim Edwards]

My best guess would be that the item was made from heavy weft twined linen, edged in leather. This is the manner in which both the Dura Europos greave / greave-liner is constructed and scraps of suspected pteryges from Masada.

[Dan Howard]

My best guess would be that the item was made from heavy weft twined linen, edged in leather. This is the manner in which both the Dura Europos greave / greave-liner is constructed and scraps of suspected pteryges from Masada.

Yep. This is the best guess based on available evidence.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

From the sculptural evidence, the pteryges on such outfit were quite soft:

<!-- l <a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?p=248142#p248142">viewtopic.php?p=248142#p248142<!-- l

[M. Demetrius]

Leather doesn't have to be hard. Goat, sheep, deer, etc., can be tanned to be supple. Think buckskin shirt or kidskin gloves.