Glued Linen Armour- a simple test

[Paullus Scipio]

Scott wrote:

This could mean a number of things and doesn't contradict Cornelius Nepos, even if he does misunderstand a few things. Also, Diodorus's words do not rule out linen armor. Should we disregard all of Cornelius Nepos, or other writers, that allow a slight misunderstanding into their texts?

...As I said, no-one is ruling out "all of Cornelius Nepos". But he is clearly wrong/mistaken to say that Iphicrates replaced mail with linen armour, since mail didn't exist at the time. This is not a "slight misunderstanding", it is an error pure and simple.

Where we have a lot of information concerning troop movement and armor getting wet is from the campaign of Alexander. And we shall see in the end, in the muggiest of conditions where cloth armor would not be allowed to dry (i.e. in India), that Alexander receives a new supply of armor and orders that the old armor be burned (Curt. 9.3.22)....armour which he must have ordered the replacements for long before the Indian campaign On a side note, there are bits of evidence that point to Alexander, and most likely his troops, wearing linen armor: Alexander wears a linen corselet before the battle of Gaugamela (Plutarch 'Alex.' 32);..which we are specifically told is of Persian manufacture... Alexander can be seen wearing Type IV armor on the 'Alexander Mosaic'; Macedonian soldiers can be seen wearing Type IV armor on the 'Alexander Sarcophagus';..no-one is disputing that he wore a Tube-and-Yoke cuirass, but there is NO evidence whatever that suggests such armour was linen the iron Type IV cuirass from Vergina (I am taking this to be a non-functional celebratory piece, most likely worn while parading); there is no evidence that there was any such thing as "parade" armour, and as Giannis has pointed out, the wear patterns suggest otherwise on the vergina iron armour.... the example of the Roman emperor Caracalla wearing a linen corselet in emulation of Alexander (Cassius Dio 78.7.1-2). Like Nepos, Caracalla is likely mistaken - that a mad Emperor some hundreds of years after Alexander believed he wore 'linen' armour is hardly evidence of anything.... When these are pieced together it becomes very convincing in my opinion.Hardly! Indeed, the opposite. One is turning incorrect/flimsy pieces of evidence into a chain which does not in fact exist. Didn't you earlier say that you were not seeking to argue that mainland greeks wore linen armour?