05-15-2007, 06:43 AM
That's a lot of valuable information in this thread. I am reconsidering leather armour after reading it.
What is not so convincing yet are the base thoughts of the "leather-arguments". There are some sources that flax was cultivated in Greece. When Pausanias speaks about "byssos" which was seldomly cultivated he mentioned by the way that flax was grown in Elis. Nothing very special in my opinion so. And we don't know wether imported linen was such expensive. Grain was also imported on a large scale as it was said before.
On the other hand great cattle with adequate leather for armour seems not to be so widely sustained. I thought at least that mainland Greece was more a country of sheeps and goats instead of cows. Is it so sure that big and thick leather hides were available at a reasonable cost? It is one thing to use leather for a shield but for armour one need even better leather. I remember the buff coats of the 17th c. AD which were quite expensive even in a "cow-culture".
I will look at the discussion with great interest, sooner or later I have to make such an armour for myself. So carry on.
The following two pictures came to my mind reading the thread and I can maybe ask some questions about it. They are from Sekundas Osprey "Greek Hoplite" and I wondered long what is depicted. The warrior on the left (edit: on the lower picture) is commentated as wisely putting his greaves on before donning his armour. But no armour is seen nearby to add. And the other guys (especially one on the right side) have not only already donned their breast armour (first) but also have pieces not worn lying around them. So is the peculiar garment of the warrior center left already his soft armour? If so leather could be excluded, it must be soft cloth armour.
The other picture (edit: the first one) could show a warm outer chiton but also a soft armour. What do you think?
(Edit: sorry for the bad quality of the pictures, I had to take photos from the book.)
What is not so convincing yet are the base thoughts of the "leather-arguments". There are some sources that flax was cultivated in Greece. When Pausanias speaks about "byssos" which was seldomly cultivated he mentioned by the way that flax was grown in Elis. Nothing very special in my opinion so. And we don't know wether imported linen was such expensive. Grain was also imported on a large scale as it was said before.
On the other hand great cattle with adequate leather for armour seems not to be so widely sustained. I thought at least that mainland Greece was more a country of sheeps and goats instead of cows. Is it so sure that big and thick leather hides were available at a reasonable cost? It is one thing to use leather for a shield but for armour one need even better leather. I remember the buff coats of the 17th c. AD which were quite expensive even in a "cow-culture".
I will look at the discussion with great interest, sooner or later I have to make such an armour for myself. So carry on.
The following two pictures came to my mind reading the thread and I can maybe ask some questions about it. They are from Sekundas Osprey "Greek Hoplite" and I wondered long what is depicted. The warrior on the left (edit: on the lower picture) is commentated as wisely putting his greaves on before donning his armour. But no armour is seen nearby to add. And the other guys (especially one on the right side) have not only already donned their breast armour (first) but also have pieces not worn lying around them. So is the peculiar garment of the warrior center left already his soft armour? If so leather could be excluded, it must be soft cloth armour.
The other picture (edit: the first one) could show a warm outer chiton but also a soft armour. What do you think?
(Edit: sorry for the bad quality of the pictures, I had to take photos from the book.)
Wolfgang Zeiler
