06-27-2006, 04:30 PM
Hi,
I don't think so. What I was aiming for, is that if the majority of the finds presents a certain thickness or thickness range, then that (to me at least) would be an indicator that not just any piece of leather was chosen for caligae, but rather that a certain leather thickness was preferred out of contemporary experience in terms of useability and longevity of this piece of equipment.
Of course we are moving on thin ice here, considering how many pairs of caligae must have existed back then and how much has actually survived and been found. But that OTOH is true about pretty much any piece of equipment we have/make reconstructions of, I think :-) )
Quote:Are we applying modern standards again?
I don't think so. What I was aiming for, is that if the majority of the finds presents a certain thickness or thickness range, then that (to me at least) would be an indicator that not just any piece of leather was chosen for caligae, but rather that a certain leather thickness was preferred out of contemporary experience in terms of useability and longevity of this piece of equipment.
Of course we are moving on thin ice here, considering how many pairs of caligae must have existed back then and how much has actually survived and been found. But that OTOH is true about pretty much any piece of equipment we have/make reconstructions of, I think :-) )
Cheers,
Martin
---------------
Martin Moser
http://www.legio8augusta.de
Leatherwork Through the Ages Homepage
Leatherwork Through the Ages Facebook Page
Martin
---------------
Martin Moser
http://www.legio8augusta.de
Leatherwork Through the Ages Homepage
Leatherwork Through the Ages Facebook Page