Linothorax design/construction

[Paullus Scipio]

Sorry, you misunderstood, so I should clarify. I meant that Xenophon speaks of a neck guard like a bevor "...And, since the neck is one of the vital parts, we hold that a covering should be available for it also, standing up from the breastplate itself and shaped to the neck ( in other words, a separate piece of armour) For this will serve as an ornament, and at the same time, if properly made, will cover the rider's face, when he pleases, as high as the nose.For the helmet we consider the Boeotian pattern the most satisfactory...."

Xenophon, then, is speaking of a separate neck guard, which covers the throat,and which may, "when he pleases" extend as high as the nose. I meant that the Derveni grave 'B' neckguard was of the type Xenophon descibes, although in this instance it doesn't extend up to the nose.

Odd that there are no images of this, unless it is like De Saxe's work and what he recommends is so idealized that it will not be found in service in any numbers.
_________________
Paul M. Bardunias

Xenophon is writing about what he 'recommends' - hence somewhat idealised. But that at least some followed his advice is shown by the existence of such neck-guards, like the Makedonian example.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

In the original text Xenophon is talking about the "auchaina" as I've already said."Auchenas" is only the back part of the neck.

[2] epei de kai ho auchên esti tôn kairiôn, phamen chrênai kai toutôi ex autou tou thôrakos homoion tôi aucheni stegasma pepoiêsthai.

"Because the back part of the neck is vital,we have to do this,from this thorax the same,we make an "auchena"(back part of the neck) protector"

After this he says that the cavalryman if he can and if he wants could extend the protector so that it would cover his face to the neck,when needed.
I repeat,"auchen" is the back part of the neck only.Now make your own conclusions from your translation.
Khaire
Giannis

[Paullus Scipio]

Yes, I see, Giannis - but if we change 'neck' in the translation I used (from Loeb) to 'back-of-neck', it doesn't seem to alter the meaning - the neck-guard can extend to cover the face/throat, and the Derveni example is of just such a neckguard, even if it does not extend to the nose.

In any event, you may be mistaken in the classical meaning, as opposed to modern greek. "Auchen", according to three classical dictionaries, means 'neck,or throat' "auchen-ios" - 'belonging to the neck' and 'auchenas' means 'of the neck'. :?

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

I also see the problem.But we do know there were "back of the neck" guards in the tube and yoke corselets(we should really find another name till we are sure of the matterial) and in even other metal cuirasses(Philip's and later Hellenistics).And I don't know how wise it is to change-even slightly-the meaning of a word to fit with our evidence.I mean,he must have had a reason to use the word "auchen"
Khaire
Giannis

[Paullus Scipio]

Sorry, you posted while I was editing mine ! As you can see, in classical times, according to three different dictionaries, "auchen" refers to the neck or throat generally, not just the back of the neck.

Also, if Xenophon was talking about the conventional neck-guard that protects the back of the neck on tube-and-yoke corselets, it would be physically impossible to extend this round the face and throat to the nose, and still put the armour on !!

[Paullus Scipio]

Hi Wolfgang!

Here is the fragment of Alkaios in question, in full :-

The great house glitters

with bronze. The entire ceiling is decorated

with shining helmets, down

from which white plumes of horsehair

nod, the adornments of

men's heads. Greaves of bronze

conceal the pegs they hang on,

shining bright, a protection against strong arrows,

while corslets of new linen

and hollow shields lie thrown about.

Beside them are Chalkidian swords,

beside them are many belts and tunics.

These it has not been possible to forget,

since first we undertook this task of ours.

The problem is, we don't know what he is writing about. It could be contemporary, since he wrote politically inspired poems, or it could be about the Trojan war, about which he also wrote a number of poems, in which case the reference to Linen would be Homeric. If we had a depiction of a tube-and-yoke corselet from this time ( c.600 B.C ), it would tie up nicely, but these seemingly don't appear 'til much later. All depictions of Hoplites from this time show bronze cuirasses , as far as I am aware. Without such a tie-up, it is most likely that he is writing of the Trojan war.....it is a tantalising piece of evidence, but in isolation, useless.

Paul, I think the greatest hindrance to accept only leather as a material for tube-and-yoke armour, is Alkaios.

This is the very thing I'm complaining of in the post above !! I don't say only leather, it just seems that way because I have ( in other threads) been forced to defend that position. What I do say is that spolades is leather, and that Xenophon speaks only of Hoplites wearing spolades or thorakes, and in Xenophon only Asiatics wear thorakes lineoi, which is a very curious thing if greek Hoplites were wearing them too.......
The tube-and-yoke corselet first appears in Attic pottery painting around 520B.C. Where did it come from?

It is sometimes said that the ‘Linothorax’ comes from Egypt, was adopted by Persians, and Athenians are supposed to have seen it worn by Persians when they were helping the Ionians revolt, and bring it back in 497 B.C. (but note that the tube-and-yoke corselet is depicted worn by greek Hoplites 20 years or more previously !!! ) :?

The basis for this tenuous theory is as follows.Herodotus mentions (2.182) a present of a finely woven and embroidered ‘thorekas lineoi’ from Pharoah Amasis for Athene in her temple on the island of Lindos. ( notice that the thorekas is qualified by the word ‘linen’, as in Xenophon, so a thorekas is not normally made of linen.) Pliny (xix. 12) says the ‘distinctness’ of the ‘threads’ in the thorekas was so often tested by sightseers that ‘parvas iam reliquias superesse hac experientium iniuria’.The threads were made up of hundreds of distinct strands. For the workmanship cf The Book of Ezekiel. xxvii. 7, ‘fine linen with broidered work from Egypt’. This doesn’t sound much like practical armour though, but something amazingly decorative. (though I’ll bet Dan Howard would disagree !)
Elsewhere, Herodotus (1.135 ) says that Persians are quick to adopt foreign customs, such as Median dress (trousers and tunic) and that “their soldiers wear the Egyptian corselet “(Aigyptious thorekas) – without however saying what it is made of. Later (speaking of Xerxes invasion) he says that Persians (7.61)â€

[geala]

Paul, you gave similar arguments in the leather cuirass thread and with this and other arguments you convinced me that the statement of linen as the only or normal material for composite cuirasses (= tube-and-yoke armour) is wrong. But it is not possible for me to make futher conclusions because we cannot know exactly what the sources mean. When Herodot or Xenophon wrote the term "linen" only in connection with foreign armour that could mean everything, that the Greeks used other materials or used the same. It is partly not a historical but a logical problem.

(Even) What Xenophon writes should be taken with care. He mentions armour which is never seen elsewhere in Greece. Is he just dreaming of the ideal cavalrymen or ruler or battle order? How far away from reality is he at the given moment? A few months ago I read a thesis about the Kyrou Anabasis in which the author points out that even in this seemingly "report from reality" many idealised aspects can be found. I cannot judge about this however. It's a pity that we don't have the other (partly earlier) reports of Kyros march and the adventures after his death.

The fragment of Alkaios was seen as a source for contemporary hoplite equipment by the author of the thesis about the development of hoplite warfare. Of course this can be disbelieved. One argument is the mentioning of the "hollow shield", a hint to the new hoplite shield with the big belly, which was not used in Homeric times. Even if it is about a Homeric scene, we would have to imagine a historical appreciation by Alkaios if he described truely Homeric weaponry of the 8th c. BC. Normally such an understanding is not assumed in the science, as far I can see (which is not far). Btw, a historical thinking of ancient or medieval authors/artists would make the interpretation of every source, esp. pictural ones, very difficult. So I believe Alkaios is describing contemporary armour.

[Paullus Scipio]

One argument is the mentioning of the "hollow shield", a hint to the new hoplite shield with the big belly, which was not used in Homeric times.

"hollow shield" is a typical Homeric phrase, used by him in Book XII for example (Alexander Pope translation) - use of the phrase is a deliberate echo of Homer - many greek poets did this.
Also, the big-bellied type of Aspis did not exist at that time either - it only appears in art in the last quarter of the sixth century, so once again Alkaios is using a crystal ball to gaze into the future !! hock:

He mentions armour which is never seen elsewhere in Greece

To what are you referring here? His recommended cavalry armour ? It did exist, and neck-guards of the type he describes exist ( see ante)

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

Alkaios with hollow shields could be speaking of anything.And hoplite shields well existed in the third quarter of the 7th c.bc. at least.(chighi vase).Homer spoke of a variety of armour of his time and earlier.Alkaios would probably do the same.And he is speaking of "new linen".What do you expect to say,old linen,unless "new" refers to the type of armour in general,and as Geala said befor,surely a time is needed from the introduction of the new armour till the vast depiction of it in art.
Paul,the evidence for the use of linen to make "tube and yoke" thorakes is poor,but at least the are clues that linen was used to make body armour that the Greeks new well.And this evidence covers a wide range,from mycenean,to Archaic and well into classical and hellenistic times.
What is your evidence for leather?Xenophon first speaks of spolades as a body protection and from another source we learn that this should be leather.And also you say he only speaks about linen armour for Asiatic armour,but the leather protection he speaks about in "about Horsemanship" and the rest of equipment is not purely greek either.
Alkaios is a sourse too early for the vast use of the linothorax but he is indeed in a time that the new type of armour would be introduced and in addition he sais "new" linen thorakes,the new refering to linen and not to thorakes!
I hate it that we are many "attacking" you all together,but we don't have an obvious reason to support linen instead of leather,do we,and thus we don't find your arguements are enough in number and in value to believe the tube and yoke thorax is the leather spolas.And note that Wolfgang has not a linen linothorax yet,and I am planning to make a new one,leather would save me a lot of work!
Khaire
Giannis

[geala]

Hr hr, never looked at it from this point of view. I've just received a big piece of leather and suddenly I think, Paul is right... :wink:

Honestly, if the "hollow shield" is a typically Homerian phrase and not much used elsewhere, that would be an argument to consider. But why should Alkaios have talked about "neo lino" when we know that the term linothorax was used by Homer? Was it used by Homer for a new form of armour? It is more probable that the material was new for the guys in the beginning of the 6th c. BC, knowing only armour of bronze and leather for actual use.

The aspis came in use in the 7th c BC like Giannis said, at least we see it on some vases together with the first stages of a kind of hoplite warfare.

I don't know much about Xenophons book about horsemanship (will try to buy it after I have read the Hellenika). Are not some parts of the mentioned armour taken from foreign countries? Do we have archeological finds (vases, armour parts) that show actual use in Greece? Just for interest, it has not much to do with linen or leather, I think.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

some of the armour of course is Greek.Like the boeotean helmet for instanve,and indeed neck gurard of different types have been fond,with and without scales.
The thing is,linen was known much ealrier than homer and Alkaios and was used for armour.Greaves,for instance,appear to be from cloth,and there are those mysterious finds from Mycenae and Thebes that no one has seen but they must exist and not published yet.So "neo" lino should mean something else,because new linen with the meaning "resently made" does not make sense!What,new thorakes with old linen?Alkaios is talking about a new type of thorax made of linen.
Kahirete
Giannis

PS.Wolfgang,I'm sending you 10 kgs of fine "new" linen... :lol: :lol: Are you still with Paullus?

[geala]

No, no, I'm very flexible, now I mean, Paul is totally wrong. :oops: :wink:

(Of course "wrong" is wrong, Paul has just another interpretation and I cannot disprove it. )

[Dan Howard]

linothorax just means "linen armour". It has nothing to do with any specific typology. It is perfectly reasonable to use the same term to describe to completely different types of armour so long as both are made of linen. How does one dismiss the description of linen armour by Pausanias?

[Paullus Scipio]

And hoplite shields well existed in the third quarter of the 7th c.bc. at least.(chighi vase).

...please read what I posted - I did not say Hoplite shields didn't exist earlier, just the 'big-bellied' type. I understand that for many on RAT, english is not their native language and so misunderstandings easily occur.
To clarify here, there are at least three variations of Hoplite shield. The earliest ( such as the Chigi vase) are shown as shallow dishes with a depth of no more than 10cm and a 5 cm rim, with an even curvature. The structure appears to be laminated strips. This type is shown on black-figure pottery, but around 550 B.C, a new type appears, with a'big belly', at least 15cm deep and the curvature gets much steeper toward the rim. This type is solid, made on a lathe ( the Vatican shield is of this type). Finally, two shield fragments found by Kunze at Olympia had curved struts on the interior to strengthen them ( c.f. the scutum, as it got lighter and thinner had structural stiffeners added )

Paul,the evidence for the use of linen to make "tube and yoke" thorakes is poor

...very poor ! ( ) D
And speaking of evidence....

but he is indeed in a time that the new type of armour would be introduced

....one should refrain from contentious statements like this when there is absolutely no evidence to support it.

I hate it that we are many "attacking" you all together

...Thank you for the sympathy, Giannis cry:

but we don't have an obvious reason to support linen instead of leather,

...but you do ! You have all grown up with Connolly, and so you intuitively " know" that greeks wore linen corselets, even though, as we have seen, there is little or no evidence for it ( and I haven't forgotten Pausanias !). If you read earlier writers than Connolly(who gets much wrong ), such as Anderson and Snodgrass, there is no 'linen bias', but rather a 'leather bias', based on all the evidence. And of course there is nothing like going to contemporary sources oneself !!
The very words used suggest non-linen, as I have tried to show.
If I use a word such as "plate", you all know that it is a dish made of ceramic china. If I want to show it is made of something else, I must qualify the word, thus "silver plate" or "plastic plate". Similarly "thorakes "was understood to mean the Hoplite's body-armour of bronze. If, for example, foreign body-armour was made of something else, the word must be qualified, thus 'thorakes lineoi' and 'Aigyptious thorekas'.

Hr hr, never looked at it from this point of view. I've just received a big piece of leather and suddenly I think, Paul is right... :wink: ..... PS.Wolfgang,I'm sending you 10 kgs of fine "new" linen... :lol: :lol: Are you still with Paullus?

Gentlemen, your light-hearted banter hides another truth, as many other re-enactors have discovered - it is alot easier to make a tube-and-yoke coselet from leather ! :wink: :wink:

[Paullus Scipio]

How does one dismiss the description of linen armour by Pausanias?

No-one is dismissing Pausanias( see my previous post, written before yours), but up until now we had been trying to confine the examination to contemporary sources,rather than later ones ( see earlier posts). Seemingly Thucydides doesn't refer to body armour, though I haven't been through him with a fine-toothed comb recently!
Has anyone else ?
For the sake of completeness, let us look at what Pausanias, writing in the second century A.D says at I.21.7 of his “Description of Greeceâ€