01-16-2008, 08:51 PM
NNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOO despite all the arguments/discussions, what i am trying to say is until proved otherwise by finds, nobody can be certain what pteruges were surely until proved positive, leather should not be ruled out. ok sculpture looks like sculpture, you cannot portray leather or linen or felt pteruges on sculpture as you can with a painting, sorry yes you can if you are an incredibly good sculpter, I do not dispute that linen was employed by the ancients as armour, but if you take the sculptures of the emporers in armour with pteruges, can you really say that multi layered linen (which is solid as you would agree) shown at the shoulders would fall like it does in the sculputure, ok artistic licence plays a big part of it and so i suppose does the fact that an emporers armour would be highly decorative and any pteruges could be a finer material and just decorative, after all its not tho the emporer is going to be in a front line engagement. If positive proof can be found that roman pteruges were linen and employed by front line troops, then i will change to linen. until then i remain with leather
martin ward
vicuscenturion
carpe diem[/quote]
vicuscenturion
carpe diem[/quote]