09-01-2016, 08:18 PM
(09-01-2016, 06:29 PM)rocktupac Wrote: We plainly say in the book that we don't know how the armor was made: "Whether the layers of these corselets were laminated together with glue or sewn together with thread cannot be determined with certainty. Given the widespread use of this armor and the lack of standardization in the ancient world, it seems safe to say that both methods were attempted." (166) I'm not sure how well some have read the book, but we never say we think it was only one kind of armor. I would suggest some people take another look, they seem to be misunderstanding things.
We also cite this website in the first page of the notes section. Was there something in particular you're talking about? I mean this sincerely, I don't quite know what you are talking about.
To tell you the truth I had missed your reference to the thread because I expected it in the sections where there were obvious elements from it, but I am comforted. I will be candid with you and tell you I have had a negative opinion of Aldrete because I thought he nudged you aside and took advantage of you, but I recently saw his talk on Youtube where he gave you credit.
I think what annoys some, myself included, is that in advocating for linen, you really did a disservice to the evidence for leather. As I said before, you are entitled to your arguments and others are responsible to refute them, but the interpretations you chose for Spolas surely stuck in the craw of some. Whatever a spolas was, it was not an arming doublet- which we never see for classical hoplites. So you have invented an item that we have no evidence for to discount it. Second, the use of Spolas in the Birds is probably akin to a butcher's apron, leather worn for protection, not warmth. The very name Spolas or stolidia, if applied to armor is obvious slang in the sense that it literally denotes an abbreviated garment. Thus I would expect to see the term have more than one contemporary meaning. Another example would be referring to the aspis as a "willow" or even the term Hoplon itself.
Perhaps, since all of this was argued (ad nauseum) on the thread it was odd seeing such an obvious and already refuted claim in the book. But frankly we are in a grey area and there is no technical requirement to cite this website. This is one reason I wrote Hoplites at War, which is going to press this week. I got tired of seeing my own ideas presented back to me.
