Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
etruscan lamellar armour
#16
Thank you to everyone: the biblio indications are very interesting.
Unfortounately Robinson says what everyone can see on etruscan artifacts, Barron could be more useful, but I haven't still read it copletely. But he too seems to add nothing definitive on how these type of plates were laced.

It seems that the plates of each horizontal row are sewn togheter with a leather or textile hemming at the top hedge, with diagonal lacing visible. The top hedge of the row overlapping the upper row.
But how were the horizontal rows connected each other?
No lateral connection seems to be.
Reply
#17
Thank you to everyone: the biblio indications are very interesting.
Unfortounately Robinson says what everyone can see on etruscan artifacts, Barron could be more useful, but I haven't still read it copletely. But he too seems to add nothing definitive on how these type of plates were laced.

It seems that the plates of each horizontal row are sewn togheter with a leather or textile hemming at the top hedge, with diagonal lacing visible. The top hedge of the row in some cases seems to overlap the upper row.
But how were the horizontal rows connected each other?
No lateral connection seems to be.
Reply
#18
Which is why it is scale armour and not lamellar. The rows are attached to the backing, not each other.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen & Sword Books
Reply
#19
Quote:Barron could be more useful, but I haven't still read it copletely. But he too seems to add nothing definitive on how these type of plates were laced.
She, judging by the name "Amy" :-)

Quote:It seems that the plates of each horizontal row are sewn togheter with a leather or textile hemming at the top hedge, with diagonal lacing visible. The top hedge of the row in some cases seems to overlap the upper row.
But how were the horizontal rows connected each other?
No lateral connection seems to be.
The BM reconstruction illustrated on p.178 does show the rows laced together, with no indication of any attachment to a backing; but it doesn't even seem to use all the holes in the scales, which can't be a good sign. Starr (1937)'s suggestion mentioned in the text doesn't involve attachment to a backing either. On the other hand the leather cuirass from Tutankhamun's tomb was scale with a linen backing, and Barron thinks that the lacing pattern on that one resembled Assyrian styles.

Which is why we don't know whether it is scale armour or lamellar. It is not clear whether the rows are attached to a backing, or solely to each other.

Nor whether these NE examples had anything to do with the Etruscan style.
cheers,
Duncan
Reply
#20
I'm sorry: I've not given attention to the first name...
The pattern I think is more suitable to Mars of Todi armour is that in fig. 5 on http://members.ozemail.com.au/~chrisandp...ellar.html

what do you think about?


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Reply
#21
Quote:The pattern I think is more suitable to Mars of Todi armour is that in fig. 5 on http://members.ozemail.com.au/~chrisandp...ellar.html
what do you think about?
Well, the band of lacing or edging between the rows certainly matches. But the Byzantine example still appears to have one small stretch of lacing visible on the outer surface of the plates, which neither the Mars of Todi nor the other Etruscan examples seem to have, so I am not wholly convinced.
cheers,
Duncan
Reply
#22
Yes, I agree.
The Byzantine example is the closer I know, but doesn't fit completely.
It would be needed that the lacing is realized with two series of holes, top and bottom, hidden by edging, so I'm searching such a kind of lammellae/lacing pattern to explain the Etruscan armours.
Reply


Forum Jump: