Gaulish felt armor

[Conal]

Without doubt the position and the gesture of the statue reminds of older models, but It's dated III B.C.

Th esuggestion is that the date is wrong ... that it is in fact earlier than the site at which it was found. If it is a IIIbc copy of an earlier style then teh armour would date earlier.

Most interesting thing, the square-structure of the armor reminds a lot similar armors like the ones on the Hallstatt scabbard, pointing out in my opinion a continuity of the use of some kind of protections.B.T.W., You can see it in the museum of Marseille.

The Halstatt scabbard is dated 450-350BC .... nothing to suggest continuity to 225BC.

think that any different situation must be analized on its own context, and that unfortunately doesn't exist a "rule" tha we can use in all the circumstances.

I agree no rule ... but to convince others its better to link as many sources as possible in a plausable way.

We know that some kind of celtic warriors, as the Gaesatae, used to fight naked, but it's highly improbable that was a rule for all celtic warriors...

the existence among celtic context of the chainmail implies the existence of a subarmalis, so the involvement in celtic warfare of organic materials to build armors or part of armors; the existence of various celtic statues and depitcions from the V to the II B.C., linked with some findings (La Gorge-Meillet Tomb) studied and analized by Andreè Rapin, pointed out that organic armors were used by the Celts.

Of WICH material they were maded of, can be a big matter of discussion: why I hypotesize felt (however without negating a parallel use of leather or, maybe, linen), I've already explained: the presence of felt protections in italic context, and the passage of Ploybius about Telamon, that I still find curious (still not convinced that a woolen cloak can be of some use against javelins)

All the sources you state are a lot earlier than Telamon., which was the starting point of this debate in that I believe it is self eveident that Polybius is not talking of armour of any sort but merely clothing .... put plainly and politely he is talking rubbish. You are right , javelins would not be deflected even by heavy clothing.

I am not saying that Celts did not ever use padded armour , just that I remain to be convinced that by 225BC they still did so.

This is a good debate though, robust, serious and polite, a learning process and something I will pay more note of in my Celtic studies more reading and reserch .... :roll:

I appreciate your initial post as it challenges pre-conceptions and complacency. Keep it coming.