12-10-2007, 03:44 PM
Hi Paul,
Please enter your real name into your signature - it's a forum rule.
I totally disagree with the interpretation of Trevino, as you probably guessed. :wink: For all we know, one vase is not proof of so far unprovenanced horse armour. What we know of Central Asian horse armour up to Medieval horse armour is that this usually was chest protection or full bards, never 'close-fitting' armour of any kind as suggested here. It's no wonder that the author comes short when trying to explain the details.
Please enter your real name into your signature - it's a forum rule.
Quote:I'm with EB and just wanted to present y'all with some of the background behind the unit.Yes, I feared you had used that one. McBride's plates are gogeous but totally fanciful at times. The author is very quick in stating that the 'horse is armoured with some kind of mail protection', but admits that 'the detail of the horse's leg armour must remain problematic'. (p.45). Indeed! No wonder McBride covers that with a man in front.
I totally disagree with the interpretation of Trevino, as you probably guessed. :wink: For all we know, one vase is not proof of so far unprovenanced horse armour. What we know of Central Asian horse armour up to Medieval horse armour is that this usually was chest protection or full bards, never 'close-fitting' armour of any kind as suggested here. It's no wonder that the author comes short when trying to explain the details.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
