More glue - bah

[Paralus]

"Against such fixity of belief, one can make little progress..."

The fact that Cawkwell was wrong weakens your arguement- but that is for another thread. :wink:

That you might disagree with Cawkwell's thesis (and I'm fully aware you do) in the paper does not negate the applicability of Cawkwell's observation which Scott has quoted. On the issue of the nature of the armour, I shall be agnostic: there is no gain in engaging in what is the RAT equivalent of Creationism versus Evolution!

Did you receive Juhel and Nefedkin?

[PMBardunias]

As far as I'm concerned doing this (i.e. exploring one possibility) does nothing to take away from the study of other types of armor.

I'm all for trying everything, for I don't believe this to ba a zero-sum game. That said I understand Dan's frustration because to my knowledge no one has tested the type/density of quilting he envisions with authentic Greek materials.

Scott, do you build a case for the existence of laminated linen armor, or simply test it because it has been suggested in the past? It is appropriate to do so because the notion of laminated linen is practically the default at this point, but I have never seen a strong case made for its origination other than it is "possible". You can see the problem with that. I'm assuming that all of the multiple literary and iconic references referred to in the army are about the linen portion and not the adhesive matrix. We've of course debated this ad nauseum and the best precursor we've come up with is the existence of laminated linen theatrical masks. Perhaps cross-culturally, paper armour as well.

That you might disagree with Cawkwell's thesis (and I'm fully aware you do)

I was being cheeky. Although ultimately wrong in their interpretation of Othismos, the Heretics made a great contribution in stressing elements of combat that were being cast aside and showing the weakness of the Orthodoxy- who are just as wrong in the details as the heretics are in overview.

Did you receive Juhel and Nefedkin?

Yes, I recieved both papers. Juhel's was Interesting, though I am troubled with the assertion that a "Stolas" includes a helmet. Which is a pivotal part of the paper. But we best discuss via email.

[MeinPanzer]

Dan, when you show me some evidence that the Greeks or Macedonians wore quilted armor then everyone can stop exploring the possibility of laminated linen armor. Simply listing what other cultures wore for protection, and applying that to the Greeks etc., does not count. As far as I'm concerned doing this (i.e. exploring one possibility) does nothing to take away from the study of other types of armor. I'm sure there are plenty that are looking into quilted armor. Nothing in this entire process has been squandered, except for maybe arguing with your negativity and neophobia.

There is certainly evidence of laminating in the ancient world. We are exploring one possible explanation of the makeup of the linen thorax, linothorax, tube-and-yoke, Type IV etc. -- whatever you want to call it. I understand your point of view and your opinions on the matter are clearly stated. Never once does our research deny the existence of quilted armor and in fact considers it a possibility (as we do with leather). And I'm not sure where you got that "Dr. Aldrete grew, harvested, processed, spun and wove his own flax fibers into linen" when this is never hinted at.

At this point I may just be beating a dead horse, but if we are going to get into this discussion, then I would ask why you based your research on the use of linen armour among the Greeks and accepted the use of leather as only "a possibility," when the body of evidence, when examined with the criterion provided in your statement above ("simply listing what other cultures wore for protection, and applying that to the Greeks etc., does not count") in mind, clearly points to leather cuirasses being the norm, with perhaps the occasional use of linen?

[Paralus]

I was being cheeky.

I know...

[Dan Howard]

At this point I may just be beating a dead horse, but if we are going to get into this discussion, then I would ask why you based your research on the use of linen armour among the Greeks and accepted the use of leather as only "a possibility," when the body of evidence, when examined with the criterion provided in your statement above ("simply listing what other cultures wore for protection, and applying that to the Greeks etc., does not count") in mind, clearly points to leather cuirasses being the norm, with perhaps the occasional use of linen?

To summarize the earlier discussions: most of the evidence for Greek linen armour dates to the Mycenaean period. During the Classical/Hellenistic period virtually all the evidence points to the Greeks using leather, not linen. All of the commonly cited sources for linen armour during this time period are not from a Greek context, but further east. The only surviving linen example that is intact enough to identify as body armour was recently found at the Mycenaean dig at Patras. It will be interesting to learn whether it was quilted or glued. I would bet money that it turns out to be quilted.

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

Anyone ever tried making ancient style glue of animal bones?

I know how to make rice glue for katana hilts and scabbards, but since the ancients did not have it, they must have used animal bones...

M.VIB.M.

[Dan Howard]

... or fish glue, or hide glue, or casein glue, or tree resin...

Is there evidence that the Greeks used any of these glues?

[hoplite14gr]

...or flour glue.

Most of these are known by tradition in various trades now vanishing like shoemakers, saddle-makers, traditional shipwrights.
I do not know how far back they go and I do not have info an the earliest possible appearance of each one.

Traces of raisin glue are being referred to neolithic artifacts from Sesklo (Thessaly) and Diro (Peloponissos).
Very unlikely that this glue disapeard in Bronze Age or later period.

Yet cremation and fire have altered the chemical of many artifacts that have been found on dead bodies so I am unwilling to speculate on that in absence of solid evidence.


Kind regards

[Dan Howard]

I'm sure there are plenty that are looking into quilted armor. Nothing in this entire process has been squandered, except for maybe arguing with your negativity and neophobia.

It is interesting that you accuse me of neophobia when you are the one clinging to an old, outdated theory that has no historic basis. It is only recently that Connolly's proposal has been seriously questioned and found lacking.

And I'm not sure where you got that "Dr. Aldrete grew, harvested, processed, spun and wove his own flax fibers into linen" when this is never hinted at.

It was taken directly from the wikipedia entry on this subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linothorax ... ax_Project
If the above quote is incorrect then it is yet another lesson for people relying on that website for research. Especially when it contains misleading statements such as:
"Some have claimed that it was made of leather, or possibly other materials, but there is little evidence to support this"
and (empsasis mine)
"the linothorax was composed of either quilted fabric layers, or more probably, laminated layers of fabric using animal-based glue (such as rabbit skin glue)"

That page should begin with something like "The word linothorax is a misnomer applied to a type of Greek armour of the "tube and yoke" typology. The Greeks themselves never used the word to describe this armour and it only serves to mislead researchers. During the Classical and Hellenistic periods most of the evidence points to this type of armour being made of leather, not linen."

[PMBardunias]

Over on the Roman forum I posted a thread about Cassius Dio's description of a 3-ply linothorax as armor for a roman "revival" of "Macedonian" phalangites. <!-- l <a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=28235">viewtopic.php?f=17&t=28235<!-- l

I was curious to know from the Romanophiles if such a 3-ply thorax, presumably a quilted gambeson, was in use with the roman army of the time of the revival or if there was a source they were drawing from for real Macedonians that we don't have. I cross-linked the thread to see if any here have opinions on the matter.

[Paullus Scipio]

Most likely, the Romans got the idea that Macedonians wore linen corselets from the famous passage describing Alexander himself wearing one at Gaugamela, which appears in Plutarch "Life of Alexander" XXXII.

After sending this message to Parmenio, he put on his helmet, but the rest of his armour he had on as he came from his tent, namely, a vest of Sicilian make girt about him, and over this a breastplate of two-ply linen from the spoils taken at Issus. 9 His helmet was of iron, but gleamed like polished silver, a work of Theophilus; and there was fitted to this a gorget, likewise of iron, set with precious stones. 10 He had a sword, too, of astonishing temper and lightness, a gift from the king of the Citieans, and he had trained himself to use a sword for the most part in his battles. 11 He wore a belt also, which was too elaborate for the rest of his armour; for it was a work of Helicon the ancient, and a mark of honour from the city of Rhodes, which had given it to him; this also he was wont to wear in his battles.

(translation courtesy of Bill Thayer's 'Lacus Curtius' website)

the "breastplate of two-ply linen" is also translated as "thickly quilted corselet"....and certainly the Persian Tube-and-Yoke corselets in the Pompeii mosaic of Issus are shown as quilted. It is likely then that Cassius Dio's 'three ply linen' was quilted, and since the Roman army, as far as I know, did not regularly use such equipment, it would have to have been specially made, like the rest of the equipment.....

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

But it is always taken in the discussions that this spoil had to be a Persian cuirass,whereas it is just as likely that the cuirass was taken from one of the greek mercenaries,who after all were the main resistance in the battle.

[PMBardunias]

I was recently reading an Osprey title on Byzantine infantry and struck by how much later gambesons resemble the T-Y corselets seen on many Asians. See below. I had always wondered why it took the shape of a T-Y and not a simple jack if it were padded, but perhaps I answered my own question long ago. If, as I believe for hoplites the aspis rim rested on against the front, left shoulder and chest, then a broad, stiff flap like the Yoke would distribute the force quite nicely. Moreso if it were made of hardened leather.

[Paralus]

[...] it is just as likely that the cuirass was taken from one of the greek mercenaries,who after all were the main resistance in the battle.

That's quite possible: the origin of the armour is not noted. On the whole though, I'd agree with Paul Mac: the artistic evidence supports the notion that this type of armour was worn by the Persians about Darius. I've always imagined - given the story is historical - that the Macedonian king, who had a firm opinion of just who he was, was unlikely to appropriate the armour of the average mercenary; more likely that of a Persian noble or even relation to the Great King. He is described as in fierce combat with these individuals at Issos. It would fit, too, with the purloining of the armour from Troy.

It is possible it was the Great King's: his baggage was captured and one suspects his weaponry and armour was amongst that.

[Paullus Scipio]

I was about to respond to Giannis in similar vein, but Paralus beat me to it ! Whilst it is just possible that the 'spoils' came from a Greek mercenary, I think it unlikely for much the same reasons as Paralus......in addition, going by the Issus mosaic and the contents of Macedonian Royal tombs, the King would already have owned (probably several) Greek-type corselets of the finest quality, and would hardly have coveted any mercenary's armour ( especially as he already had 'Achilles' armour and shield....to wear a lesser Greek's equipment than the King of Macedon, or 'Achilles', would be an affront.) In addition the Greek mercenaries were, in Alexanders view and propaganda, 'traitors' and hence not honourable foes worthy of despoiling. The Persian King on the other hand was the arch enemy, and wearing his despoiled armour ( or that of a Royal relative) would not only be 'honourable', but a vivid reminder to the whole Macedonian Army of what had occurred the last time they met 'The Great King'........if one combines this with the description in detail ( hardly necessary if the corselet was of a type familiar to Greeks - one could have said, like Herodotus " ..closely resembling Greek", or "like ours" or even "a fine Greek corselet" if it had been so) the clear implication is that the corselet was a Persian one, probably belonging to Darius himself.