09-09-2016, 05:55 AM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2016, 06:08 AM by Paullus Scipio.)
No, I have never missed the point let alone "once again". This an example of innuendo, and to be deplored. Nor do I 'brush off' the technology. Having 'wonderful' technology that can identify organic glue, and its type isn't new, as I said.
Furthermore you don't seem to understand the 'linophiles' fundamental problem, which as I said, is:
"Your problem ( and that of the rest of the 'linophiles' ) is to find a linen artifact firmly dated to the right period, that can be positively identified as a piece of armour, then identify 'layers' and finally identify glue......."
....the last part, about identifying glue (with or without the technology you refer to), is the least of your problems.
And how is who first postulated 'glue' relevant to anything? The two 'sources' you referred to are in any event both flawed, as I pointed out earlier.......
Joe Balmos wrote: "I'm still looking for that quote of yours in the book I mentioned."
...I gave you 'bell book and candle' and you still can't find it? I'll try again - see attachment, last paragraph next to the photo.....
As to your last part, you are being disingenuous and misleading. I have explained more than once why we have no Tube-and-Yoke corselets from Graeco-Hellenistic southern Greece. We do have lots of examples from tombs in Macedonia,Thrace, Scythia, the North Black sea cities and the Scythian steppes, some of which are almost certainly of Greek manufacture ( along with the Helmets and other artifacts found with them )
I am not going to list all the relevant archaeological reports.....you must do your own research. In any event, this thread is not about leather Tube-and-Yoke corselets which definitely physically exist,( see attached intact example of cavalry corselet and Greek helmet from a Thracian Prince's tomb, made of leather re-inforced with scales. For full details see the "Unusual Thracian Tube-and-Yoke corselet" thread - the stupid format won't let me 'copy and paste' the url, despite allowing me to do so with quotes on an apparently random basis) but about Aldrete et al's postulated glued linen corselet for which there is no evidence.
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
09-09-2016, 08:49 AM (This post was last modified: 09-09-2016, 09:00 AM by Dan Howard.)
Quote:see attached intact example of cavalry corselet and Greek helmet from a Thracian Prince's tomb, made of leather re-inforced with scales
That is not leather armour. The metal plates provide the protection, not the backing. AFAIK we have no Graeco-Hellenistic examples of either leather or linen armour at this point in time.
Quote:see attached intact example of cavalry corselet and Greek helmet from a Thracian Prince's tomb, made of leather re-inforced with scales
That is not leather armour. The metal plates provide the protection, not the backing.
Normally I would agree with that Dan, but in this case the question really is what is the base material. The answer to what the T-Y was made of can't be "scales", though so many of them were scale covered. This whole xebate has become silly to me, because we are really arguing percentages and geographical and temporal trends. The answer to if a hoplite ever wore a linen T-Y is almost surely yes at this point, and the answer to if a hoplite wore a leather T-Y is also surely yes. Now we are down to what was more common when and where and with which class.
As to whether glue was used, I think the most logical stance at this point is that it is a possibility, but one with little physical evidence to support it at this point. That will all change if the immunoassay shows rabbit all over a pile of linen some day. Of course there would still be issues. I did my masters in a molecular biology lab and have done this test. It would for example pic up the rabbit glue in the gesso that was used to cover the aspis face. Probably pick up the rabbit stew spilled as well. Maybe now we know why the Spartans mocked their foes when there were so many living rabbits just outside their walls.
I have no idea what your point is. Leather, scale, mail, plate (and possibly cloth) armours were all made in the tube and yoke style. It was the fashion of the time to make all armour in this style. Armour consisting of overlapping metal scales on a leather foundation is not leather armour, it is metal armour.
(09-09-2016, 12:24 PM)Dan Howard Wrote: I have no idea what your point is. Leather, cloth, scale, mail, and plate were all made in the tube and yoke style. It was the fashion of the time to make all armour in this style.
Well, that is my point. The answer is all of the above and we are just arguing what was most common at this point. But you can't make armor of scales unless you lace them together. You make either leather armor with scales or linen armor with scales. It is important to this argument what that base material is. Otherwise tou end up with a leather T-Y, except for that panel under your right arm which is metal armor for example.
I think what Dan means is that finding a tube-and-yoke corslet consisting of a leather backing with metal scale providing the actual protection doesn't really inform you about the likelihood of a tube-and-yoke without scale being made out of leather. The physical properties required of a backing for scale and of a standalone armor are different.
(This is how I understand it -- I am of course less familiar with armor than any of you...)
Dan D'Silva
Far beyond the rising sun
I ride the winds of fate
Prepared to go where my heart belongs,
Back to the past again.
-- Gamma Ray
Well, I'm tough, rough, ready and I'm able
To pick myself up from under this table...
-- Thin Lizzy
(09-09-2016, 02:05 PM)Dan D Wrote: I think what Dan means is that finding a tube-and-yoke corslet consisting of a leather backing with metal scale providing the actual protection doesn't really inform you about the likelihood of a tube-and-yoke without scale being made out of leather. The physical properties required of a backing for scale and of a standalone armor are different.
Sure, I agree. Obviously the leather can be thinner if you are going to put scales over it. But I can tell you that if we found a corselet of glued linen with scales over top this debate would be over. So why not give leather that same respect?
"She concludes: “An alternative explanation might be that there had been several items of armour in the bathhouse, and that among them there may [my emphasis] have been, as already suggested above, one or more items principally of linen, perhaps even a linen corselet.” [ Most improbable in the 1C AD, over 300 years after the Tube-and-Yoke corselet went out of general use]"
Ah, there it is on page 68 as you said. I wanted you to speak to the context of the statement you used from the book, which you did not. The context from the book is that the linen fragments identified as pteryges could have been "parade armour" as envisaged by Steibel and Magnes in the paragraphs just before your quote. Context is important here as it provides one plausible reason why linen armor was present at that site, at that time. When hard pressed any group of fighters would use whatever was at hand, even an antique, that still provided some protection. I do not find this concept hard to consider and the site, the desert Fortress of Masada, was apparently a storehouse of such things.
It's really not that hard to imagine either. Active duty US soldiers near Washington DC often wear outdated Colonial costumes for parades, as do guard units all over the world such as the Vatican Swiss Guards. Would they use muzzle loaders? If that was all that was left between freedom and slavery, surely.
Quote:Sure, I agree. Obviously the leather can be thinner if you are going to put scales over it. But I can tell you that if we found a corselet of glued linen with scales over top this debate would be over. So why not give leather that same respect?
I give both if these ideas exactly the same respect - none. Leather armour is 1-2 cm thick. Leather backing for scale armour is a few mm. The function of the leather in both of these instances is completely unrelated. The same difference can be noted when comparing linen armour and linen backing. You can't take a leather spolas and retro-fit it with metal scales. You need to design it to take scales from the start - the manner of construction is completely different.
Quote:Sure, I agree. Obviously the leather can be thinner if you are going to put scales over it. But I can tell you that if we found a corselet of glued linen with scales over top this debate would be over. So why not give leather that same respect?
I give both if these ideas exactly the same respect - none. Leather armour is 1-2 cm thick. Leather backing for scale armour is a few mm. The function of the leather in both of these instances is completely unrelated. The same difference can be noted when comparing linen armour and linen backing. You can't take a leather spolas and retro-fit it with metal scales. You need to design it to take scales from the start - the manner of construction is completely different.
Would you then say that armors like the one below with only one small section covered in scales and 1-2cm thick everywhere else and a separate sown in thin leather panel with scales attached? I find that unlikely.
Also, I found a couple of good pics I have of the Dura greave.
Why do you think the scales are located in that position? It isn't because that is where the most protection is needed. It is because that is the part that requires the most flexibility. It was a compromise to keep the cost down while optimising effectiveness of the armour. More expensive armour had greater coverage of metal.
(09-09-2016, 11:28 PM)Dan Howard Wrote: Why do you think the scales are located in that position? It isn't because that is where the most protection is needed. It is because that is the part that requires the most flexibility. It was a compromise to keep the cost down while optimising effectiveness of the armour. More expensive armour had greater coverage of metal.
We will have to agree to disagree because I have no evidence of course, but I find the fact that the scales are so often on epomides to point to protection as much as flexibility. Speaking of flexibility, I have never seen this fully explained, see attached.
09-09-2016, 11:41 PM (This post was last modified: 09-10-2016, 12:10 AM by Dan Howard.)
Scale armour provides some horizontal flexibility - letting you bend sideways. If you use thick leather or linen, you lose this. It can be flexed around the body (like plywood) but it can't bend the other way.
(09-09-2016, 11:41 PM)Dan Howard Wrote: Scale armour provides some horizontal flexibility - letting you bend sideways. If you use thick leather or linen, you lose this. It can be flexed around the body (like plywood) but it can't bend the other way.
With a proper T-Y, and the ones that are not are legion online, the tube ends above your hips, so much like the bronze cuirasse the inflexible tube doesn't form such a handicap. I cinched my tube tight at the waist, which let the hips take most of the weight, so I could not easily rotate inside of it. Giannis's bronze looked to be even more easy to wear.
09-10-2016, 12:38 AM (This post was last modified: 09-10-2016, 12:52 PM by Dan Howard.)
A cloth or leather T-Y should end at the navel and floating rib - just like a metal cuirass. If you can cinch it at the waist, it is too long (and too thin and flexible). But a cuirass performs better if you have some flexibility over the ribs, which is why scales are better than cloth or leather, and mail is best of all. Ideally you want flexibility all the way round but the right side is more important.
