10-04-2013, 12:34 AM
Quote: It would contribute far more to this subject than all the resources that were squandered messing around with glue.
I see that Dan Howard is always very affirmative when it does not believe in any particular theory. As I read his interesting book "Bronze Age Military Equipment", I could appreciate his "personal" positions on - for example - the shield of Ajax or his approach to the new dates which not much archaeologists in France, for example, attach great importance.
It should be noted that the book "Reconstructing Ancient Linen Body Armor" deals with the classical Greece, that tests were made with glued and not glued linen cuirasses and that on some five years of work, if my memory is good. The results are interesting, it's the least we can say.
'Wearing the cloak' book I've read also and the two discoveries of Masada and Dura Europos relate very later (also the subtitle of the book is "Dressing the Soldier in Roman Times"), namely 1st and 3° centuries of our era. We are very far from the Greek concept of the 5th and 4th centuries.
If it can be hypothesized that cuirasses of lin go back undoubtedly to the Pharaonic Egypt - say, to simplify, across the new Kingdom — there is no difficulty in admitting that various techniques have had to exist in time regarding the composition and constitution - based on the dangerousness of the offensive weapons of the opponent - of these cuirasses of lin.
I don't think so not only could time be lost following the assumption of - for example - an Peter Connolly on the formation of layers of linen glued whose the book in reference allows us to read a very serious study providing results that can be interesting.
I just wanted to say that to deny the theory of something does not say that this thing has been useless when very serious study comes out and seems to demonstrate the contrary... :dizzy:
