09-01-2016, 05:14 PM
(09-01-2016, 03:30 PM)rocktupac Wrote: I suspect that even if we uncovered a completely intact glued-together set of linen armor many would still argue until they're blue in the face that they don't exist.
I know that some are perhaps too hard on slamming the door on adhesive, but lets not dismiss their objections simply because of the vehemence of their presentation. The fact is that your book makes a case for layers of glued linen. I am happy to entertain that as a possibility, but at this moment in time it is more weakly supported than leather, twinned linen and quilted linen. If there is some additional evidence for glued linen in the future, and I hear there may be, that will change everything. The case right now rests on drawing in glued linen from industries not even related to garment manufacture- I drew attention to mummies and masks on our thread back in the day, but even then knew it was weak at best.
The reason for the strong reaction against glue is that for a long time this was just the accepted fact based on no evidence whatsoever. No one even made a case as strong as yours, they simply hypothesized it and it caught on as dogma. They fight hard because they are fighting the force of history. Ask yourself if you would have looked at glue if that had not been the going assumption. If Connolly had claimed thick twinned linen the base material, it would be dogma today- and benefit from a lot more evidence.
Much of the ire at your book is simply because people wished you had tested a wider variety of possible materials, but this is unfair, you get to decide the scope of your study and someone else can falsify your experiments if they wish. Honestly, I do agree with Paul that you should have cited this website. Much of the information was obviously from our thread- even if you investigated it independently you saw it here first. I assumed that was Aldrete. Many of us have been plagiarized repeatedly by researchers who should know better, so we are sensitive to these issues.
