linothorax and other white cuirases

[Urselius]

I think that the scaled or feathered muscle cuirasses seen in sculpture represent iron or bronze cuirasses covered with a thin skin of bronze/tin/silver-gilt decorated with repoussé ornament. The same method would also work for those cuirasses decorated with figures. The steel cuirasses of the Napoleonic French Carabiniers had a thin skin of brass or copper on their outer faces.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I've argued against this stuff quite often. And when I say quite often, I mean it comes up all the freaking time because these two guys on this forum I'm on won't drop it and I'm dumb enough to keep arguing with them.

This thread pretty much sums it up:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthrea...-equipment

I used Sim and Kaminski's Roman Imperial Armor as a source, which isn't exactly a great book, but it got the point across that the arguments for textile muscle cuirasses don't hold up.

[Dan Howard]

As I pointed before, no single reference about chainmail musculata...

There are no Latin references to hamata at all until Jerome's Vulgate in 405 AD.and musculata is a modern word just like segmentata.

[Dan Howard]

I think that the scaled or feathered muscle cuirasses seen in sculpture represent iron or bronze cuirasses covered with a thin skin of bronze/tin/silver-gilt decorated with repoussé ornament. The same method would also work for those cuirasses decorated with figures. The steel cuirasses of the Napoleonic French Carabiniers had a thin skin of brass or copper on their outer faces.

He could simply be wearing scale armour.

[Xavi]

Hi Urselius
Of course can be made like that, but you will agree that covering metal with scales is just an ornamental nonsense, that only Frech napoleonic minds could do, to replicate something that they have no clue of how it works.
Romans were practical people, and armours were something with very specific values: Protection and lighness
The arrangement does not offer any of those.
In the other hand does not explain Suetonius lorica, that clearly describes it as Linen

[Xavi]

But there is a clear reference of Linen Lorica...

[Dan Howard]

But there is a clear reference of Linen Lorica...

Did the Greeks and Romans wear linen and leather armour? Yes.
Was it made in the shape of a muscled cuirass? No.

[Dan Howard]

Of course can be made like that, but you will agree that covering metal with scales is just an ornamental nonsense, that only Frech napoleonic minds could do, to replicate something that they have no clue of how it works.

We have Greek bronze helmets with scale decoratation engraved onto the surface just like the Renaissance and Napoleonic examples. Here is one engraved to look like a boars tusk helm.

Romans were practical people, and armours were something with very specific values: Protection and lighness. The arrangement does not offer any of those.

I'm pretty sure we have heavily decorated Roman helmets with clear evidence of battle damage.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I'm pretty sure we have heavily decorated Roman helmets with clear evidence of battle damage.

Budapest comes to mind.

And nobody is saying that someone put scales on top of a muscle cuirass, we're saying someone made scale armor and the artist made it look like a muscle cuirass. Roman artists took a lot of artistic license because their work was more than art: it was propaganda.

[Youngster]

Hi Thomas
It is a possibility, but you will agree that building a stiff ending on a chaimail, will lose the advantadges of a chainmail flexibility making it unconfortable to wear. In the other hand we do not have any reference of this kind of cuirasses.

Nobody is saying that the hamata was actually muscled, but only that it was cut in the manner of musculata, e.g, with a curved bottom edge, but also sometimes still retaining the shoulder doubling.

[Dan Howard]

Did you try?

Of course. The only way to make leather or textiles capable of resisting an arrow or spear thrust is to make it quite thick - 10-15 layers of quilted linen or 3-4 layers of heavy leather. At these thickneses it is as stiff as a board. A heavier bow needs over 20 layers of linen or 6-7 layers of leather. Forget about glue. Textile armour was quilted.

One of the reasons to investigate in glued linen is that it floats. I ask Aldrete to try if the cuirass was able to float and he did confirm me. The problem is that rabbit glue get dissolve in water.
As the origins of the armour are probably from the navy, if we asume that Iphicrates has something to do in their adoption by greeks, an armour able to float makes a big difference.

It sinks when someone is actually wearing it. It can't act as a life preserver.

How do we know that Iphicrates introduced linen armour? Most of the evidence for Greek armour at this time suggests that it was made from leather. Iphicrates was a shoemaker after all.

[Youngster]

Chain mail musculatas?

You didn't differ between closing mechanisms and joining/pivoting mechanisms. So the the difference between joining systems is just a difference between the joining system (i.e. hinges) and the closing system.

You will agree that is very extrange to have hinges just in one side. The weight of a musculata is close to 20 kg.
Hinges are not just a closing mechanism, helps to divide the weight equaly. Imagin this 20 kg subjected just in one side in a trotting horse for 20 minutes....
You can see in this pictures a real musculata hinges:

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dpd/italica/twlanuvium09.jpg

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dpd/italica/twlanuvium06.jpg

The Priima Porta arrangement is sugesting a much lighter cuirass.

I'm re-posting Thomas's explanation because he had already clarified it before you misinterpreted it. Hinges open and close the cuirass, like the hinge on on a door. they let it swing open while staying joined on one side. A different closure is needed on the other side, such as a tie or strap. to keep it closed. Having two hinges on armor would be like two hinges on a door; each would prevent the other from opening, rendering it useless. So actually, it would be very sensible to have a hinge on one side only. Not only sensible, but the only way hinges are actually used.
Hinging also doesn't really have anything to do with weight, assuming that the hinges are suitably robust. Your 20 kg figure is much too high regardless.

Xavi, you need to slow down your posts and read the replies more carefully. We can't have a discussion if you are not responding, but merely posting.

[Xavi]

Hi Gaius
I try to reply one by one, and I include explanations, references and pictures everytime. Things that some of the replays did not.

You say:
"I'm re-posting Thomas's explanation because he had already clarified it before you misinterpreted it. Hinges open and close the cuirass, like the hinge on on a door. "

This is untrue. The hinges work as a closing device, avoiding movements and distributing weight. The bolt pass through to close and make it strong.
As you can see in the images I attach from a bronce cuirass, they use big hinges in both sides, with bolts that can be removed.

In the Augustus sculpture, the door mechanism is in the shoulders, with two hinges, not in the sides that just work as a closing mechanism.. Will be impossible to open the cuirass with hinges in the shoulders and in the sides.

[Dan D'Silva]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthrea...-equipment

Oh god. First the Podromi cuirass isn't iron, even though that's obviously what it is. Then if it is iron, it's just "ceremonial."

[Alexand96]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthrea...-equipment

Oh god. First the Podromi cuirass isn't iron, even though that's obviously what it is. Then if it is iron, it's just "ceremonial."

Yep, that was painful. MMFA, you're wrong because you are just wrong. Probably born to be that way, it would seem.

I wonder why the muscle cuirass always inspires such deeply held beliefs in the hearts and minds of men? Especially with such little evidence!