A History of the Idea of Glued Linen Armour

[Sean Manning]

And many people are interested in ancient linen and leather armour, but most of them don't have resources to track down Byzantine chronicles or articles in German and Italian from 1874 and 1887. The members of the Green Bay Linothorax Project worked hard to publicize their project and to give the impression that the glue theory is the most plausible. So if you do have resources, I think its important to be very clear and honest about the evidence, even the evidence which does not support your favourite theory.

[Dan Howard]

The book has other problems. According to Aldrete's figures, his linen construction seems to provide better protection than a similar weight of hardened steel! In the real world we had to wait for the invention of aramid (Kevlar) to do that. Plus, the so-called bronze plate he tested was 20% less dense than real bronze, suggesting either his measurements were sloppy or he never used bronze at all. In addition, he said that the metal was annealed, which destroys the work-hardening and seriously compromises the metal's ability to stop weapons.

[Hanny]

This claim has put historical research back decades. It is this kind of spurious logic that leads to highlander ninjas. Proper research is based on evidence, not baseless speculation. It is good to keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out.

Fact free opinion, and not all opinions are equall, yours being an excellent example of how unequal they can be.

[Sean Manning]

This claim has put historical research back decades. It is this kind of spurious logic that leads to highlander ninjas. Proper research is based on evidence, not baseless speculation. It is good to keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out.

Fact free opinion, and not all opinions are equall, yours being an excellent example of how unequal they can be.

Hi Hanny,

a cool thing about science is that we can verify claims rather than judging them by who is saying them! For example, if you don't trust my translation of Niketas Choniates, the article in Mouseion has the Greek text and an alternate translation by a medievalist who is not involved in this debate!

You can read the site reports from Mycenae and Tarquinia which the Green Bay team cites on my site and see that there is nothing about glued linen in either and that the linen from Italy is not even layered. They are also from places and times which did not leave us the pictures of the shoulder-flap cuirasses or the texts which mention linen body armour.

If anyone ever finds evidence for glued linen armour in the ancient world (other than "we built some and it looks kind of like these paintings and protects pretty well") , they can bring it forward for examination.

[Feinman]

We are relying on circumstantial evidence to make inferences and draw conclusions about the construction of linothorakes --and, circumstantial evidence is evidence especially when it is corroborated by finds or descriptions in texts.   When we find more pieces of the armour then we can have physical, testable proof.  There is some circumstantial and physical evidence for the use of twining as a technique for the manufacture of linothorakes, and circumstantial and physical evidence for layered linen armour in the period we are discussing, but there is no evidence for the use of glue, as Sean has shown.  Some of these errors can be traced back to Peter Connolly.

[Creon01]

Without disregarding what Sean and Todd say, I was a tiny part of that after all and agree in large part, the question of what all those tube and yokes were made from is still fundamental to every Hoplite reenactor as we have to wear something to reenact what we see on all those depictions. Sean did an excellent job regarding the History of the Idea of Glued Linen Armour and Todd is serious about attempting to make a viable linen tube and yoke. I never quote Aldrete as I don't want to just rely on one source, but to me he does prove the viability of layered linen armor, glued or not. The late Eddie Cheshire of the UK based Archaeological Leather Group proved the viability of glued layered linen armor in a more scientific measurable manner and his work and our too brief correspondence has had a larger influence on my thinking than Aldrete.
                                                                                                                                                                                     
Viability is the easy part, plausibility is the hard.

I can't get on Facebook at the moment to access data on a rare artifact that Paul Bardunias has mentioned a few times. As I recall it was a scrap of ancient linen shield facing that was glued onto wood. Not sure where it was discovered, but I think it is the only "evidence" we have of glue being used as an adhesive to bind linen to anything in a military context. Is this an anomaly or was this something so common to not be worth mentioning? Hard to say of course in the military context. 
                                                 
I feel we all do, or should, agree that adhesives and glues were ubiquitous in the Eastern Mediterranean world...it's what kept the spearhead and sauroter on the dory after all. A sauroter in a UK museum still has pitch inside. Now this is not evidence of usage of an adhesive with layered linen in the body armor context, but it does indicate that the availability and efficacy of glues/adhesives were not unknown to the Hoplite.
                                                                                                         
Moreover, in the absence of direct evidence there are other interesting ideas that are being explored and should be discussed. Apparently veg tanned leather was not common in the Hoplite era, oil tanning seems to be what was used (for reasons that escape me) and I am told such leather is very difficult to add vibrant colors to due to the oils used in the tanning process...so what explains our new awareness of garish colored tube and yokes being used by Hoplites?

We also need to understand that the type of linen possibly used to make the Amasis armor might not be the type of linen we have now according to none other than Hero Granger-Taylor. She thinks it was spiced and twisted ultra fine linen rather than the more familiar draft-spun linen. Spiced linen seems to have been more widely used in Europe than once thought, based upon recent hard evidence, and then around 600 BC becomes rare and it is speculated that it might have continued to made for specialty pieces like armor. Ancient spun linen is not as fine as spliced linen therefore less dense material can be created for such things as armor, unless one uses multiple layers. Density is a critical factor and that's the same with leather armor as well.

Linen as an available material, like glue, was ubiquitous in the Eastern Med. and bovine hide was not. The Greeks had cattle, no doubt about that and imported hides, but the cattle they ate (rarely) were young males with the occasional ox, and their young soft hides were poorly suited for armor. The UK based Archaeological Leather Group has some excellent free publications on what types of hide are best for armor, and why in minute molecular detail. If all those tube and yokes were leather where did all that tough dense oil tanned leather come from?

There's also been some recent interesting work on rubbing/impregnating kaolin (a white clay) into linen armor as there is a bit of written evidence that points in that direction. It would help explain those depictions of white tube and yokes, but my guess it was the use of natron as a bleaching agent that made them white, if they were linen, as natron has an added benefit of being a known anti-septic used for treating cuts.
                                                                                                                                                       
What about Alum tawing? Unless there is some new data it was here on RAT that this technique was found to be unused in the Hoplite era.
                                                                                                                                                                                       
Please don't quote to me all the various translations of the word "Spolas" as I've considered them all, and in context, and they are vague at best and at worst point away from the Tube and Yoke. 
                                                                                                  
I certainly do not dismiss the use of leather for the tube and yoke, it is completely plausible that some tough dense bovine hide was available to make very effective leather armor without scales. Was there enough of that during the Hoplite era to outfit all the tens of thousands of Hoplites over many centuries? I am skeptical and when I asked that question to Jeremy McInerney of the Univ. of Pennsylvania and author of The Cattle of the Sun: Cows and Culture in the World of the Ancient Greeks he pondered a bit and said "no."

If there was not enough appropriate bovine hide then the only other material available in quantity would be linen. Did they use some type of glue to keep the layers intact as the armor was being constructed...no hard evidence yet but I'm still looking and before CV was talking to a lot of people. The problem is not that we don't have the technology to find it, it's that nobody is looking for it.

[Feinman]

Nicely put, Creon1!  Well, I hope they find evidence of a special glue; it would make things easier.
The closest thing I can think of that the ancients would have had access to is something like this:



https://www.google.com/books/edition/The...%20plaster

The problem is that it must be relatively waterproof, very adhesive and flexible.. That's why folks resort to the modern rubberized glues..

[Dan Howard]

We know that alum tawing was being practiced in Egypt in the Bronze Age and that it was widespread in the Middle East during the Iron Age. There is no reason to think that tawing wasn't practiced in the Aegean.

[Creon01]

Dan, I don't disagree at all. I would be more surprised if some alum tawing was not being used, and as you see I am fine with reasonable speculation. There is no evidence though as I recall until after the hoplite era ended. There is a RAT discussion regarding it's usage or rather it's non-usage. Even if such a-t leather were available the question is again a question of scale. Some argue that not all hoplites were kitted out with the tube and yoke and some even say that the Spartans abandoned most upper body armor late in the hoplite era while others point out that Iphicrates preferred linen armor over bronze...so it's hard to say how many hoplites wore the tube and yoke. My opinion is maybe not all, but many, and that number is then in the tens of thousands throughout Mainland Greece of the period

---

Todd, I wonder IF IF IF and when any sort of adhesive or glue is discovered with linen as armor what its function could have been? It could have simply been used to hold all the layers together as the tube and yokes were custom fitted to the hoplite providing no additional protective value at all and then sewn up, or as Eddie Cheshire discovered...when granulated stone or horn were added to the glue saturating the linen the protective value of the linen armor increased dramatically. The question of the durability of ancient glues when in contact with water is also in need of serious study as the Greeks were of course a seafaring folk and any armor would have to be somewhat resistant to falling apart when wet.

[Creon01]

For those that asked and are too LAZY to look themselves (you know who you are lol) here is where Granger-Taylor speculates regarding the use of spliced linen for armor. It's in the wonderful book "Wearing the Cloak" which everyone here should read.

   

---

Regarding spliced linen, a subject I feel will force us to rethink some of what we believe regarding linen armor this is a must read. It's technical, but short. 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.100...018-0677-8

---

Here's one of several discussions regarding kaolin and linen armor. Sorry yes it's on Facebook, but it's a good discussion and I posted pictures to help folks visualize what the stuff is.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/37100672...5727845333

---

More technical data on the efficacy of kaolin.

https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.udel...0yAemsBsDU

---

Not only does kaolin make textile fabric more protective it also has medicinal values regarding bleeding that the ancients were probably aware of as they used kaolin extensively for many purposes.

   

---

Can't find the RAT discussion on the question of alum-tawed leather being present in Greece during the hoplite era but it is Carol van Driel-Murray that makes the assertion that there is no known evidence available. I wonder if that is still true?

[Creon01]

Here is perhaps the worlds only kaolin saturated tube and yoke. Actually the artisan made two and sadly neither were for me. We'd like to test it, not to prove that the ancients used kaolin, just to see if the kaolin added any protective properties to this linen. It's just too beautiful though to stab or shoot arrows into...

Soon the maker will provide his own posts regarding the manufacture of this piece. 

   

[Dan D'Silva]

Apparently veg tanned leather was not common in the Hoplite era, oil tanning seems to be what was used (for reasons that escape me) and I am told such leather is very difficult to add vibrant colors to due to the oils used in the tanning process...so what explains our new awareness of garish colored tube and yokes being used by Hoplites?

Just gonna throw this out there:  In my experience, oil-tanned leathers take colors well.  I've dyed it with madder and painted it with a beeswax-linseed oil medium.  It is not oily in texture, and the sueded surface makes it easy for paint to stick.

[Creon01]

Apparently veg tanned leather was not common in the Hoplite era, oil tanning seems to be what was used (for reasons that escape me) and I am told such leather is very difficult to add vibrant colors to due to the oils used in the tanning process...so what explains our new awareness of garish colored tube and yokes being used by Hoplites?

Just gonna throw this out there:  In my experience, oil-tanned leathers take colors well.  I've dyed it with madder and painted it with a beeswax-linseed oil medium.  It is not oily in texture, and the sueded surface makes it easy for paint to stick.

Dan, I am happy someone commented! I'm not an expert on hide and rely on the good folks over in the UK with the Arc. Leather Group. One of the issues they have, I'd say we all have in fact, is acquiring accurately produced leather and to some extent textiles to work with. Modern versions of materials common in the ancient world have titles that may not accurately reflect their composition (think commercial bronze) or are made from animals/plants that were not common in ancient times. 

I know you are very dedicated to your reproductions, much like Todd, and do your absolute best, but there is a limit to what we can work with based mostly upon financial resources. If you say that oil-tanned leathers take colors well (and of course I Googled it months ago and there are plenty of colored "oil-tanned" leather products) I will not argue that point. I would ask if your leather is actually generally the same as what the ancients had available. If not, that does not diminish your excellent work that we are all aware of. 

Not having 100% or even 50% accurate reproductions is no bar from reenacting of course, as I always say we do what we can with what we have...and acknowledge our limitations. The limit for hoplite reenacting is "300" gear and that's a low bar I'd say. Similar to someone pointing out on another RAT discussion regarding Roman reenacting, today's hoplite reenactor is much much better than what was common a decade ago and thanks to RAT is much better informed.

So let's see some pictures!

[Dan D'Silva]

I would ask if your leather is actually generally the same as what the ancients had available. If not, that does not diminish your excellent work that we are all aware of.

I doubt that anyone is producing oil-tanned leather in exactly the same way as was done in the ancient Mediterranean.  What we can get is of the same family, so to speak.  Most "oil-tanned" leather on the market, if I understand correctly, is not in fact tanned with oil but instead veg- or chrome-tan treated with oil after tanning, so it has a smooth surface with the grain intact and is oily-feeling.  True oil- or fat-tanning is described in the Iliad:  You start with a wet hide, apply fat, and knead it until it's dry and the fat is absorbed.  Usually the grain is scraped off to make it easier for the fat to penetrate, unless you want a hair-on hide.  This is pretty much the same method as braintanning and (when semi-mechanized) used to produce chamois (at least as we define it in the States -- the kind here is actually sheepskin, not chamois goat) and old-fashioned German buckskin.

I've only worked with the latter two (plus buff, which is similar but also involves sulphur somehow).  I'm aware of one major difference:  Most braintan made for day-to-day use would be smoked in order to, as I understand it, infuse the hide with aldehydes from the wood and bind the fat to the collagen fibers, so that if the hide became wet, it would be easy to re-soften when dry, instead of reverting to a rawhide-like texture.  Chamois and German buckskin are made with fish oil which supposedly generates its own aldehydes as it oxidizes, obviating the need for smoking.  This is where I'm reading most of this:  https://www.taxidermy.net/threads/80733/

As far as dyeing goes, the upshot is that fish oil-tanned leathers would be lighter in color.  Smoked oil-tan varies from sort of a goldenrod color to medium brown.  So, in theory, a smoked oil-tanned hide should be to some degree darker and more yellow-brownish and this would be visible unless it were either dyed so darkly that the hide's intrinsic color difference is hard to see, or painted with an opaque pigment.

This is my chamois dyed with madder.
   

I haven't saved any of the test swatches with oil-wax paint. But I've used both red ochre and ultramarine. The result looks pretty much like you'd expect -- ochre gives you barn red, ultramarine gives royal blue. It's matte (maybe with just a hint of shine) and opaque, flexible, and waterproof when dry; the only drawback I've found is it has to be rubbed in and is no good for producing intricate designs.

[Crispianus]

You may be interested in this, Sämischegerben essentially "tanned" with fish oil, the main requirement is clean and dehair the skins and then work in the oil, these people do it in the family waterpowered hammerwalken pretty much the same as its been done for the last 300 years, the 1979 "Der gerber" is worth a look since its still pretty much by hand:

https://www.gerberei-kolesch.de/mediathek

There are lots of things used these days for veg tanning the principle is the same though the main difference is the process has been mechanised to speed it up... and of course many different recipes are used to produce leather with different properties...