Origin of the lorica squamata

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Alan,

Indeed this is OT from the origins of the spatha, and interesting enough for a new topic:

As an aside, slightly off topic, but I can easily disagree with Dan Howard on the origin of scale armor. The oldest form of scale armor came from horse-hoves; it was cavalry armor. The cavalry, the chariot, and horse warfare comes from the steppes, not from the "Near East." It predates the Persians, the Greeks, and whomever else used it as protection. The use of full armor, scale or otherwise, can be traced back to the Massagetae (pre-Alans)and then back to the Altai kurgans (pre-Saka), all of it worn before the Greeks were stuffing linen into padded armor.

Although I am not convinced that chariot warfare is the same as 'cavalry warfare', I am in some doubt as to the origins of the scale armour. The first that I know of it is from ancient Egypt. I greatly doubt that the Egyptians received it from the steppes! In my mind, it's the development of metallurgy that's at the base of this armour, not the domestication of the horse. Likewise, chariot warfare hardly evolved on the steppes, right? It originated in the Near East, among the city states of Mesopotamia.

[Dan Howard]

AFAIK The earliest example of possible body armour are the four plates found at Asyut, Egypt and dating to the 11th or 12th Dynasty (1800-2000BC). They are the right size and shape but only have two holes and so don't conform to any other scales in the record. The earliest confirmed example of body armour are the scales found at Nuzi and described in the Nuzi Tablets, dating to the 16th century. Greek scales have been found all over the Aegean dating from the 14th century. I can't think of any reference to armour made from horses hooves dating anywhere near this early. I'm pretty sure there aren't any examples of Kurgan armour dating this early. Ruben might know more.

These are the four Asyut plates. They are currently in the Petrie Museum.

[Conal]

These are the four Asyut plates. They are currently in the Petrie Museum.

They look more lamellar than scale, how would they be put together?

[Dan Howard]

The difference between scale and lamellar is whether a foundation is required in the construction. If those holes are for lacing then it would be impossible to assemble it without a backing and so would definitely be classed as scale, not lamellar.

[bachmat66]

salve,
from the books I have it seems that the earliest scale plates, thus armor, appeared with the Hyksos' 'invasion' and M.V. Gorelik in his book on Ancient weaponry (would be nice if this was translated into English) and armor gives Gaza as the site for such finding from late 18th to early 17th century BCE (Gorelik p. 102-3 ) . Also Russian/Soviets found such elements of armor already in the Caucasus region dated to the same II millennium BC.
Egyptians, Mesopotamians seem to have been using armored belts already in the late IV and III millennium BC, and at the same time were using soft materials armor (Gorelik, p83), and later reinforced with bronze round 'plates', this method that might have originated in the Mesopotamia in the III millennium and spread into Asia and Egypt.
What happened in the steppe - Andronovo etc - during that time well there is lack of archeological evidence, but for arrows and chariot equipment eg frontlet for horse head, but Vedic writing offers some insight into the charioters' armor - 'armored' hood, throat protection extending on the chest and and back, arms protection etc ; so it seems that had to have some armor already, perhaps of bone or horn style first and then once they came to have the Mesopotamian armors a bronze ones (see Origins of Indo-Europeans, page 136)- culminating with the Hyksos maryanu warriors' armor in Palestine and Egypt.

[Dan Howard]

salve,
from the books I have it seems that the earliest scale plates, thus armor, appeared with the Hyksos' 'invasion' and M.V. Gorelik in his book on Ancient weaponry (would be nice if this was translated into English) and armor gives Gaza as the site for such finding from late 18th to early 17th century BCE (Gorelik p. 102-3 .

Does Gorelik cite his evidence?

Egyptians, Mesopotamians seem to have been using armored belts already in the late IV and III millennium BC, and at the same time were using soft materials armor (Gorelik, p83), and later reinforced with bronze round 'plates', this method that might have originated in the Mesopotamia in the III millennium and spread into Asia and Egypt.

There is no evidence for this at all apart from some dodgy interpretation of some crude illustrations.

What happened in the steppe - Andronovo etc - during that time well there is lack of archeological evidence, but for arrows and chariot equipment eg frontlet for horse head

There is definitely physical evidence supporting this.

but Vedic writing offers some insight into the charioters' armor - 'armored' hood, throat protection extending on the chest and and back, arms protection etc ; so it seems that had to have some armor already, perhaps of bone or horn style first and then once they came to have the Mesopotamian armors a bronze ones (see Origins of Indo-Europeans, page 136)- culminating with the Hyksos maryanu warriors' armor in Palestine and Egypt.

The Vedas certainly mention armour but what is the earliest reference? There is no evidence for Mesopotamian body armour, only helmets. If you go and look at the illustrations that are being used as evidence then you'll dismiss them without further thought. Right now the earliest extant example of body armour that is remotely credible are the Asyut plates, which predate the Hyksos invasion.

[Sean Manning]

AFAIK The earliest example of possible body armour are the four plates found at Asyut, Egypt and dating to the 11th or 12th Dynasty (1800-2000BC). They are the right size and shape but only have two holes and so don't conform to any other scales in the record. The earliest confirmed example of body armour are the scales found at Nuzi and described in the Nuzi Tablets, dating to the 16th century. Greek scales have been found all over the Aegean dating from the 14th century. I can't think of any reference to armour made from horses hooves dating anywhere near this early. I'm pretty sure there aren't any examples of Kurgan armour dating this early. Ruben might know more.

These are the four Asyut plates. They are currently in the Petrie Museum.

The Achaemenid period scales from Persepolis which I imitated have two holes each, although others from Persepolis have 3 or 4 holes (Erik Schmidt, Persepolis II plate 77). But the holes are in the top edge not seemingly random places like the Aysut scales, and bronze age scales would be a better parallel.

[bachmat66]

salve,
from the books I have it seems that the earliest scale plates, thus armor, appeared with the Hyksos' 'invasion' and M.V. Gorelik in his book on Ancient weaponry (would be nice if this was translated into English) and armor gives Gaza as the site for such finding from late 18th to early 17th century BCE (Gorelik p. 102-3 .

Does Gorelik cite his evidence?

sure he does and also drawings of these small plates and scale, and lamellae, after all he is an 'akademik'. He has written very interesting scholarly articles on various ancient and medieval Central Asian warriors, most of them are in Russian

Egyptians, Mesopotamians seem to have been using armored belts already in the late IV and III millennium BC, and at the same time were using soft materials armor (Gorelik, p83), and later reinforced with bronze round 'plates', this method that might have originated in the Mesopotamia in the III millennium and spread into Asia and Egypt.

There is no evidence for this at all apart from some dodgy interpretation of some crude illustrations.

well, he has drawings and cites sites where these finds come from from other literature.
He also spends considerable mount of time on metal corselet/cuirass of the Bronze Age, and says that lamellar armor belongs to the later I millenium BC.

What happened in the steppe - Andronovo etc - during that time well there is lack of archeological evidence, but for arrows and chariot equipment eg frontlet for horse head

There is definitely physical evidence supporting this.

but Vedic writing offers some insight into the charioters' armor - 'armored' hood, throat protection extending on the chest and and back, arms protection etc ; so it seems that had to have some armor already, perhaps of bone or horn style first and then once they came to have the Mesopotamian armors a bronze ones (see Origins of Indo-Europeans, page 136)- culminating with the Hyksos maryanu warriors' armor in Palestine and Egypt.

The Vedas certainly mention armour but what is the earliest reference? There is no evidence for Mesopotamian body armour, only helmets. If you go and look at the illustrations that are being used as evidence then you'll dismiss them without further thought. Right now the earliest extant example of body armour that is remotely credible are the Asyut plates, which predate the Hyksos invasion.

I do not know, have not read that far yet, Bronze Age and Early Iron Age are my newest readings, so to speak. But reading about the Bronze Age one can see from various works by archeologists etc that Southwestern Asia and perhaps Egyot had difficulty securing enough tin for their bronze production, whereas Anatolia and Central Asia had plenty of that strategic material. Therefore bronze was expensive and perhaps that is why body armor was not plentiful then. It changed during the Late Bronze Age, through trade and tribute, and body armor became affordable to the maryianu elite and their employers?

[Alanus]

Although I am not convinced that chariot warfare is the same as 'cavalry warfare', I am in some doubt as to the origins of the scale armour. The first that I know of it is from ancient Egypt. I greatly doubt that the Egyptians received it from the steppes! In my mind, it's the development of metallurgy that's at the base of this armour, not the domestication of the horse. Likewise, chariot warfare hardly evolved on the steppes, right? It originated in the Near East, among the city states of Mesopotamia.

Hello, Robert, Dariusz, and everyone, :wink:

I didn't mean to toss a big wrench in the historical works, but it's my hunch that scale armor predates metal, ie leather and horse-hooves. And I agree with Drs. Anthony and Kelenka that the chariot was a steppe innovation, as was the domestication of the horse and its subsequent use in warfare.

I agree with Dariusz. The Androveno and adjoining Sintashta Culture seem to be the true catylists. From them, we see the spread of metallurgy, beyond arsenical, into the tin-rich Altai and then south into Afganistan. The Androveno is the "Indo-European homeland" searched for by Mallory and Gimbutas, and it gave us the eventual Kushans (Yu-chi), the Northeastern Iranian cultures, and the forming Indic records of the Mitani and Vedas. The Sintashta chariot graves predate the use of that vehicle by the Mesopotamians by at least 200 years.

It would be here, in Androveno, at the base of the Urals, that we would find so much that then spread into the Fertile Crescent and onward to Egypt. Robert is correct in noting that chariot warfare was not like cavalry warfare, but it was the predecessor.

Previously, as little as ten years ago, historians discounted "barbarian" societies as the inventors of anything, always giving sedentary cultures credit where (apparently) credit was not due. Androveno-- and especially the Sintashta chariot graves and bronze-working "houses-- have changed the perspective, and in large measure. To the south, shortly thereafter, we find archaeological evidence of the horse and tin "barons" who established new trade routes into Mesopotamia and India. They were essentially Androveno-bred chieftains.

It would be from this historical base that warfare advanced; and among those innovations would be leather, hoove, and finally metal armor (plus the development of composite bow). To pin down various forms of lorica-- based on random holes, theoretical lacing, etc.-- as "first" being Egyptian or Greek or Mesopotamian, is by-and-large a guessing game until more archaeological information becomes available. But to discount the steppes as the origin of both armor and horse warfare is folly. :roll:

I regret that I'm tied up in editing and publishing at the moment. I cannot give my full attention to this subject, but I'm thrilled that the banter is lively and well thought out.

[Alanus]

To Dan Howard and those who might be interested, :-)

I have taken the same stance as Gimbutas, Mallory, and Anthony. Whether it's lorica squamata or lamellar or plate, the primary function was probably established prior to metal. Even the shifting basis of warfare and the emergance of the "general" has its origin upon the steppes. It was this early culture, c. 4800 BC and onward, that destroyed the paleolithic culture known as "Old Europe." It was essentially Indo-European, not Mesopotamian or Egyptian.

Here are a few references:

Marija Gimbutas, The Language of the Goddess; describes the great cultural transition from mother-goddess to the patriarchal newer warrior society. I think Gimbutas was the first to figure this out.

J.P. Mallory, In Search of the Indo-Europeans; another "early" take on the steppe origins of societies that would eventually change the face of warfare. An excellent book.

David W. Anthony, The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. This is new and extremely important since Anthony has pinpointed the location of the emerging I-E culture. A lot about metalurgy and horse warfare here.

Pita Kelenkna, The Horse in Human History. The early chapters are excellent as an overview of newer research.

These books are seemingly not connected to the origin of squamata, yet they give the catalysts, plus a newer perspective on the intensity of the earliest steppe cultures; and from this Into-European genesis the later Greek and Roman societies emerged.

[Dan Howard]

sure he does and also drawings of these small plates and scale, and lamellae, after all he is an 'akademik'.

I didn't mean it like that. I was hoping to try and get a copy of the original report or journal article.

[Dan Howard]

I have taken the same stance as Gimbutas, Mallory, and Anthony. Whether it's lorica squamata or lamellar or plate, the primary function was probably established prior to metal. Even the shifting basis of warfare and the emergance of the "general" has its origin upon the steppes. It was this early culture, c. 4800 BC and onward, that destroyed the paleolithic culture known as "Old Europe." It was essentially Indo-European, not Mesopotamian or Egyptian.

If you look at the entire history of warfare there are many many more people who fought without armour than with. If nothing else then Occams Razor suggests that we must assume that armour was not worn until evidence is produced to the contrary.

[Alanus]

If you look at the entire history of warfare there are many many more people who fought without armour than with. If nothing else then Occams Razor suggests that we must assume that armour was not worn until evidence is produced to the contrary.

Back to you, Dan

But we have the evidence. :wink:

The great number of graves from Siberia, down to Pazryk, Tuva, and the Mongolian steppe, have been remarkably preserved due to freezing; a literal time capsule. They range from the Neolithic to Iron Age; and most interesting are the older graves. We see 4th-3rd mil BC sophisticated weapons, overlapping hide armor, bone and wooden splints, leather helmets with Greek-styled crests, and wicker shields. This is still the stone age.

When the early bronze age arrives, and I mean arsenical, the armor blooms, some of it heavy, including scale, lamellar, and the splints I mentioned on an earlier post. This is all an offshoot of a prehistoric technology that predates the Androveno-Sintashta Culture, located from the Urals eastward into the Altai. This armor is well-pictured in a series of Novosibdom articles with accurate artist reconstructions of clothing, armor, and weapons.

It's obvious, at least to me, that the sophistication of armor followed the same path as did weapons. They go hand-in-hand. Certainly, a great number of societies never developed or used armor in the millennia prior to AD. Look at the Africans or Native Americans. But not so with the earliest Indo-Europeans and pre-Hunnic/Mongol societies. We know that Lord Wuling borrowed these technologies and horsemanship in the 7th century BC. And by the time we hit the Warring States period, the Chinese were using heavy armor borrowed from barbarians to the north and west.

We are looking at well-thought-out armor in the barbarian north long before the rise and fall of Babaylon and the flowering of Egyptian dominance in north Africa. These are the same founding tin barons who supplied that early commodity into India and Mesopotamia.

There is a remarkable consistancy to this scale, lamellar, and plate armor, from its birth in Central Asia to its introduction in Roman ranks. The early forms of bronze armor from Siberia down to Mongolia continue through to the Saka, particularly the Massagetae, the Wusun, Yue-chi, Hsung-nu, Alans, Huns, and the Warring States, Han, and Three Kingdoms Chinese who borrowed it from the above tribes. It is the same armor pictured on the Orlat Plaque and most recently in John Woo's film, Red Cliff. And it has the longest and finest tradition of any armor I know of. :-D

[Dan Howard]

Thanks for your patience Alan. I was thinking more of Mesopotamia rather than Siberia. You've presented more than enough evidence for Central Asian armour but there is little to suggest that the Mesopotamians wore body armor.

We see 4th-3rd mil BC sophisticated weapons, overlapping hide armor, bone and wooden splints, leather helmets with Greek-styled crests, and wicker shields. This is still the stone age.

This I'd like to learn more about. Do you have a cite for a journal article on one of thse finds?

[bachmat66]

I might have missed the III-IV millennia armor articles , usually read about the Saka and Sarmatians, but these are rock drawings from Upper Altai of warriors http://history.novosibdom.ru/files/u4/sibir_22.jpg , although they are dated to the late III/ early II millenium or Bronze Age.
I have this Russian publication by Solov'iev where II millennium armor of horn plates are discussed and reconstructed - these come from southern Siberia, burial ground of Sopka-2 (scale armor), Rostavka (plate-lamellar) http://history.novosibdom.ru/files/u5/sibir_30.jpg : these were excavated by V. I. Matyushenko (Tomsk University, 1988; and the findings are located in the Archeological Museum of the Tomsk University, Siberia). In his book Solov'iev offers breathtaking reconstructions of the warriors of these cultures (Seymiysko-Turbynskaya http://history.novosibdom.ru/?q=node/36 & Krotovska http://history.novosibdom.ru/files/u5/sibir_35.jpg )
this is a reconstruction of Andronovo chariot from Solov'iev http://history.novosibdom.ru/files/u5/sibir_49.jpg
That book should be translated into English, it is a shame
Alanus, what a succinct synopsis of proto-Indo-European cultures' impact on the Chinese, Central Asia and ancient Mesopotamia & Egypt! Just one caveat as to American Indians - they most likely had wooden armor/leather (later cotton quilted armor) and soft -leather helmets, definitely the ones in the North America had those protections against arrows and clubs..
Dan, when I get some time I will dig into Gorelik book to show these scales and other pieces of armor he discusses