Armor Penetration and Armor resistance.

[Craig Gascoigne]

Dan

Actually I think its supports your theory of the quilted as the glue version really gave no or minimal protection at best.

I believe the quilting would give some additional resistance but understand why when other forms came readily available this form was made out moded. One of the major benefits is the weight this type armour is way lighter than bronze or iron if I had march 20km I chose the quilted linen each time.

[Paullus Scipio]

Dan , could you give alittle more evidence for this ----Herodotus, I believe, describes extremely fine linen when speaking of Amaris' gifts to greek temples to dress the Godesses with, but calls this "remarkable", implying that it was something special in his day.....

[Paullus Scipio]

H..mmm... Craig, that seems to be more consistent with what little we know from ancient evidence than the super resistance we have anecdotal evidence for recently for linen.......

[Dan Howard]

This armour was never out moded. It survived well into the Middle Ages in Europe as the padded jack. It was worn for at least a thousand years in India as the peti. It was worn in Persia, Turkey, China, South-East Asia, South america. Padded, quilted textiles - either linen, cotton, or manila - have always been worn, sometimes by those who could easily afford metal armour. Spanish chronicles said that the conquistadors abandoned their metal armour in favour of the native quilted armour partly because it offered better protection against native weapons (not sure I believe this). It can easily be made to offer the same protection as metallic armour. The problem is that this type of defense is much heavier than metallic examples. It is the whole reason metal was used - any other material that is made to provide a similar protection weighs more than metal.

Linen hardly offers "super resistance". If a material can't withstand a one handed stab then there is no point wearing it. Decent armour will stop an arrow fired from short range or a two-handed melee attack. I doubt 15 layers of linen can do this but have no doubt that 30 layers will. But if you need textile armour this thick then you are better off going for metal. It will be lighter and thinner.

[Craig Gascoigne]

Dan

Out moded may not be the correct term, but the rise of ore based armour was fairly comprehensive at least in the west.

Vegetable based armour from cotton and flax had place in padding and a place for swift movement. The Spanish experience in south America proves that.

While relative effective when the opportunity existed most west armies for optimum protect went to bronze then iron. I find interesting when penetrative weapons reach their hight in the form of fire arms, light armour forms made a come back, I think this relates more to the need to maneuver than for the need for protection.

[richard robinson]

Craig that is a fair recount.
However I need to ask whether that linothorax was estapolled by any waterproofing or hardening agent (apart from paint) at all. Peter Harris's linothorax i am sure could have been penetrated if that spear was razor sharp but I myself whacked into it often enough with little perceivable damage. I believe that the "shell" of an armour will determine the penetration of an weapon. Although I concur with Dans observations on wadded/ layered armour I am not ready to concede the non-existence of traditional glued linothorax as yet.

I have always imagined that Connolys reconstructs/ depictions of Alexandrian thorax armour with scale and lammelar were a natural progression- with bronze plates being added to the linothorax. Also Since seeing Mark R's thorax i have suplemented my own (admitably leather)thorax with plate inside a la Duncan Head. It certainly, I think, fills the niche between a 'light' linothorax and a heavy(?)/ expensive cuirass of bronze

regardz

Richard R

[Craig Gascoigne]

Richard

I think Dan's theory and evidence he has provided is very sound. Even with modern glues and paints any additional protection you get from these would be minimal.

The quilting sounds sound idea to me, but if I was my life on the line and I could afford it I have the quilted linen with bronze or iron scale or wear the quilted armour under metal.

Like to see the cut test with quilted piece, then a quilted and bronze scale piece of armour be very interesting experiment I think.

[Anonymous]

I have already demonstrated in a previous thread why the "glue" theory is no longer supportable.

Hmm? You put forward some powerful arguments which I personally found very persuasive, but I think the above is, nonetheless, an over-statement. I'd say you have demonstrated, very cogently, why you think that is the case. Some others appeared unconvinced; your statement makes it sound as if there is no room for doubt, the debate is over and your view has triumphed. I think it's a little misleading to present it in that way to anyone who may not actually have read the thread.

[Matthew Amt]

The only good test on bronze armor (shields, actually) that I know of is one by Barry Molloy a couple years ago.

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread ... adid=21752

I've heard a lot of stories about square holes in Classical Greek cuirasses and helmets, supposedly caused by spear buttspikes, but I wonder if many of those might be simply nail holes resulting from the use of those pieces as trophies, or from being hung up on temple walls and such. Not that the buttspike isn't an impressive weapon!

Khairete,

Matthew

[Anonymous]

An interesting post, Matt. A friend of mine is currently working on a TV programme, in which he tests shields and (I believe) armour in the same ways, plus shooting arrows at the stuff. I don't think he's allowed to release the results before the programme is broadcast, but I'll try to let you know when that will be. I think he's covering Bronze Age to Medieval weapons and armour.

That business about butt spikes has never convinced me and I have put forward the same suggestions as you have, above. I was told (second-hand) that the size of the holes is consistent with the larger object ( the butt-spike). Hm. I just don't see how you could get enough weight behind the blow without stopping to adopt a strong stance and grip - while the prevailing view seems to be that advancing Hoplites would simply jab their dories downward [i]en passant - (oui, - et les trois ours.)[i]

The notion that you could make an effective weapon out of a broken dory and its butt-spike also seems flawed, to me. The shaft isn't likely to break at a length which would make the remainder convenient to use and the spike is heavy enough to make it clumsy. Of course, you could use it as a mace - once you've fully separated the butt-end from the shattered front, got a suitable grip on it and brought the thing up to a usable position, by which time you could have drawn your kopis or xiphos.

The pottery representations of broken spears which I have seen, thus far, all exhibit "greenstick" fractures. If the wood of the shaft does break in such a way, breaking off the butt-end would be far too time-consuming to make any sense. I've recently seen a (short) spear-shaft broken in the arena, and this was a clean break. In such a case, using the sauroter would be more likely but I then go back to the other problems.

I have two sauroters, one brass and one bronze. Neither is very strong and neither keeps its point very well. They would be very unreliable for inflicting puncture wounds in combat. We might suppose that the originals were stronger, but who knows?

This is not to say that I think the sauroter would never have been used as a weapon; what I suggest is that it would be used if everything conspired to make its use more practical than drawing the proper side-arm, as a weapon of desperation or last resort. The legend is that the Spartans (and therefore, probably the Thespians ) at Thermopylae resorted to their fists and teeth; I am sure the sauroter would have got a look-in before they reached that stage.

Finally, I can envisage sauroters being used to punch through armour, by people who have leisure to bring them to bear effectively, as when finishing-off any wounded. But why would they, unless the dory was broken? - and if it is, why not call your mate over to do the job with his unbroken spear? Why pierce the helmet or cuirass, when it can be captured as booty?

[Dan Howard]

The whole "glue" theory was based on nothing except an observation that the shoulder sections on some illustrations indicate some rigidity and "springiness". That is the whole rationale behind it. It was pure speculation based on a misconception that quilting could not prodcue the same effect. There is absolutely nothing else to back up this theory. I find it utterly mind boggling that this idea still has any support.

[Primvs Pavlvs]

Have there been any Greek needles that would be capable of sewing through 30 layers of linen? It would take a very strong steel needle to sew through this many layers of linen. Every ancient needle I have seen were either bronze, or bone. Not saying that these wouldnt sew it, but it would be very difficult.

[Dan Howard]

The only evidence we have for Greek linen armour suggests that it was around 15 layers not 30. Medieval jacks could be up to 30 layers thick. In any case properly cast and work hardened bronze is far superior to all but the best quench hardened steels. It would have been well within the capability of a bronze age smith to make a bronze needle capable of sewing 30 layers of fine linen.

[Dan Howard]

I have always imagined that Connolys reconstructs/ depictions of Alexandrian thorax armour with scale and lammelar were a natural progression- with bronze plates being added to the linothorax.

The problem with this is that there was plenty of this scale armour being used by all bronze working cultures since the beginning of the Bronze Age. There was no "natural progression"

This site has some videos showing some test cutting against various materials including a padded gambeson.
http://www.thearma.org/Videos/NTCvids/t ... erials.htm
It is fairly conclusive that sword cuts are pretty useless against virtually any material that was ever used to make armour.

[M. Demetrius]

In any case properly cast and work hardened bronze is far superior to all but the best quench hardened steels. It would have been well within the capability of a bronze age smith to make a bronze needle capable of sewing 30 layers of fine linen.

Pretend it's leather...first you punch a hole with a special tool, then sew it with even a blunt needle and thread. We know they stitched leather together, so it would have been a small idea shift to punch the linen stack and sew as if it were leather.

Just a thought from a multitasking craftsman, not a historical treatise, though.