Who would win?

[Anonymous]

I think this assertion is a little overbold; there is strong evidence to suggest that the linothorax was predominant in the Persian Wars.

Yet none suggesting that the Spartans wore it before about 435BC.

As you know, the key dates of the Persian Wars are 490, 480 and 479 BC.
These all clearly precede the date you quote. The Spartans took part in the Persian Wars. There is no evidence, that I'm aware of, to suggest that the Spartans were a special case, in this respect. Had they been, it would have provoked comment. If you have evidence from primary sources that refutes this, I'm prepared to change my view, of course.

[M.ilionario]

Now this is going a bit off-topic isn't it? :evil:

[Zenodoros]

I think this assertion is a little overbold; there is strong evidence to suggest that the linothorax was predominant in the Persian Wars.

Yet none suggesting that the Spartans wore it before about 435BC.

As you know, the key dates of the Persian Wars are 490, 480 and 479 BC.
These all clearly precede the date you quote. The Spartans took part in the Persian Wars. There is no evidence, that I'm aware of, to suggest that the Spartans were a special case, in this respect. Had they been, it would have provoked comment. If you have evidence from primary sources that refutes this, I'm prepared to change my view, of course.

Here's the evidence - try finding a Spartan statuette from those eras wearing linothorax. Or a Spartan vase painting from those eras showing linothorax. All of them (that we have excavated, of course) show Spartiates bronze cuirasses, first bell, and then muscle by 480 and 479 BC. There is nothing suggesting linothorax.

I'm not saying that they never wore linothorax. For all we know, they probably did - we just having nothing to suggest that in the Persian Wars. But I personally think that only the perioikoi did, and the hippeis and homoioi were supplied with much more regal and expensive bronze cuirasses, possibly to show their class. As there were so few of them in comparison to the hoplites of other states, then this could have been relatively easy to afford.

To me, the linothorax is as much a common misconception and myth as is that they always had the lamvtha on their shields, or that they all constantly shaved their moustaches. Neither is true.

I know this is off topic, sorry.

[M.ilionario]

Then what do you think would be better against Romans? Cuirass or Linothorax?

[Jeroen Pelgrom]

a metal cuirass as a sword can not penetrate it.

[hoplite14gr]

15 to 20 layers linen are quite reistant to blade jabs!
Check the linothorax threads.

Still my questions went unanswered:

How much of a moron would be the Roman to position his men where he would not exploit the flamks?
How much of a moron would be the Greek not to try hit him oblqully or avoid a fight if terrain was unfavourable?

The respective societies had able leaders at their prime.
No officers would fight the way Francisco suggested with the type of troops and training he suggests.
The argument can go up to eternity.
Kind regards

[M.ilionario]

@ hoplite14gr

Like I said in the first post: "This is a mere speculative topic"

I just want to hear your opinions, nothing else :roll:

Peace.... :wink:

[Anonymous]

Here's the evidence - try finding a Spartan statuette from those eras wearing linothorax. Or a Spartan vase painting from those eras showing linothorax. All of them (that we have excavated, of course) show Spartiates bronze cuirasses, first bell, and then muscle by 480 and 479 BC. There is nothing suggesting linothorax.

That isn't evidence, it's absence of evidence - and I expect you know what archaeologists say about that.

You have every right to believe that the predominance of the linothorax is a myth, should you so wish. What is a little overbold is to state your opinion as an established fact.

[Anonymous]

a metal cuirass as a sword can not penetrate it.

Is this something that has been tested? I know that a Dendra-style panoply has been tested against arrows, and it resisted them quite well, stopping bronze ones and only being penetrated to a non-fatal degree by steel ones ( mind you, I understand the replica armour was 3-5 mm thick). Have you come across any research into the effects of swords on cuirasses? I've got a bronze muscle cuirass, but I don't want to run tests on it.

[Anonymous]

A couple of points:


3) Romans with pila fought with Pyrrhus, fought at Cyanocephalae, and fought at Pydna. In each case, the pila failed to destroy the front of the phalanx. In each case, the Roman swordsmen could not carve a hole into the front of the phalanx. In each case, it was the flanks of the phalanx (and its breaking up in rough ground) that allowed the Romans to recover, and ultimately win the battle.

Fair point, Felix and, if the pilum isn't as effective as it's cracked up to be, the Classical Phalanx would whip the hide off any Roman army, whether the phalangites were Spartans, Macedonians or "effete, degenerate, wine-swilling Athenians".

(Yes, I appreciate that this assertion may be a little over-bold, but I'm trying to match Tarby for provocative chauvinism :twisted: )

[Tarbicus]

:? evil:

I'm sayin' nowt.

[Zenodoros]

Here's the evidence - try finding a Spartan statuette from those eras wearing linothorax. Or a Spartan vase painting from those eras showing linothorax. All of them (that we have excavated, of course) show Spartiates bronze cuirasses, first bell, and then muscle by 480 and 479 BC. There is nothing suggesting linothorax.

That isn't evidence, it's absence of evidence - and I expect you know what archaeologists say about that.

You have every right to believe that the predominance of the linothorax is a myth, should you so wish. What is a little overbold is to state your opinion as an established fact.

I don't think that the predominance of linothorax is a myth... at least not in Sparta. I believe it was used basically everywhere else in Greece, as well as most Greek colonies.

There is a lack of evidence for linothorax, but because of that, I think we should just assume that they did wear bronze over linen. It simply makes more sense to me.

[Anonymous]

[I don't think that the predominance of linothorax is a myth... at least not in Sparta. I believe it was used basically everywhere else in Greece, as well as most Greek colonies.

There is a lack of evidence for linothorax, but because of that, I think we should just assume that they did wear bronze over linen. It simply makes more sense to me.

I'd understood that you were not arguing against the predominance of the linothorax in the rest of Greece.

You say that wearing bronze makes more sense to you. Certainly, one would expect it to make more sense from the point of view of resisting penetration (but see the other linothorax posts on that), yet the very fact that the majority of states were opting for the linothorax indicates that this was the option that made most sense to them.

I'm sure your aware of the eternal trade-off that soldiers must make between protection and mobility. We've already agreed, I think, that the majority of Greeks were opting for greater mobility in the Persian Wars and I believe it's generally accepted that the Spartans eventually opted for no body armour in the Peloponnesian Wars. Going for the linothorax prior to this would seem to me a natural transitional stage.

[Magnus]

The discussion of the armour worn by said spartans is relevant to this topic since it helps give us a sense of their capabilities vs certain weapons, mobility, etc. etc. which all have a bearing on the outcome of a spartan vs legionary.

[hoplite14gr]

The abandonment of armor at the Peloponesian war was not necessarily universal. A large part of the actions were raids and being "lightened" helps.
This was perhaps typical of "marines" doing shore raids.
I do not buy it that hopites fought unamored in a "planned" engagement.
Xenophon talks about armor in his works at this period which implies that it was used. Also in the National museum in Athens there are suvivng armor fragments from this period. The social fabric had been eroded and hoplites were less in numbers but not unarmored.
"Mass" history books make claoms that usually are not backed up.
Kind regards