Leather Cuirass

[Sean Manning]

Now,well,when the Greeks wanted to show thick overgarments,they did it clearly.

This is my problem. You take a couple of examples and extrapolate to say that ALL artists used the same style. All you can say for certain is that THESE artists showed overgarments when they wanted to. Unless you can prove that ALL artists used the same artistic conventions then this line of discussion is a waste of time. Same with so-called leather armour; same with visible stitching; same with undergarments; etc etc. Without supporting evidence from texts or the archaeological record, artistic evidence is worth very little.

This line of argument can be used to 'disprove' any sort of evidence. Afterall, textual or archaeological evidence only shows that in one place or time, some armour with a particular feature was used. "You can't take a couple of finds and say all Roman scuta were made of plywood."

As always, we must go by the preponderance of the evidence and consider all types of it. We only know many fifth-century soldiers wore armour with this cut through artwork, after all! The most disturbing thing from that "leather linothorax" thread was the realization that we simpply do not know what Xenophon or Miltiades would have called a 'linothorax' other than "thorax." Systematically examining Greek conventions in depicting clothing is a promising approach, although one that would require a great deal of work.

Gluing does explain the consistent smooth appearance of 'linothoraxes' and the stiff shoulders. However, it would weaken the armour and be vulnerable to rain. Leather is poor armour for its weight and would be hard to paint, but would also look smooth. Quilted armour would have stitch lines that are absent on most artistic depictions, but was effective and common in other periods. Right now there is no theory that clearly explains all the evidence without serious problems. I'd be happy to leave it at that, but others seem to disagree.