The type of bow I used (a compound hunting bow) is irrelevant, what's important is the velocity and type of arrow and arrow head used. For this test I used real bronze trilobat arrow heads made by a smith in the UK. I affixed these to everyday wood / carbon hunting arrows, which I then weighted to ensure the final mass was as close to being historically accurate as possible. The final step was to use a chronograph (measures the velocity of the arrow) to tune the bow so it fired the arrows at the correct velocity.
With a compound bow you get better scientific results, since the draw weight will be very consistent. Thank you for this presentation and your work. If you ever cared to repeat it with the TH-cam ballistic standard of pork ribs and orange stuffing, I'd be interested in if these penetrating arrows lose depth of penetration. There's also the fact your shots are worst-case for the target. Shots falling onto the target in plunging fire may be more this armor's intention to defeat. Even so, it seems a good flak-jacket for the common grunt.
It's most likely made for moderate protection from melee damage - not arrows which is the intent of the large round hoplite metal shield. It's probably made to be lightweight and offer good mobility for the wearer.
I wouldn't be so sure. While I would much prefer a shield myself, armor provides very little defense against spears, which was the definitive weapon of the era. its really academic, but my testing has shown that it does in fact provide protection from arrows. That being the case, I would think it was used with that in mind (even if it also provides protection from melee attacks).
Also, Alexander the Great's army did not carry hoplon into battle. They wielded two-handed sarissas. They did have a telamon shield though, named for the method of securing it, which involved strapping a small aspis to the left shoulder. I suppose they could raise it up to protect the front of their bodies from incoming arrows. I also have read that linothorax may have been supplemented with plate/scale segments and definitely with a metal helm.
@@bellgrand Right, i think most people belive that they were metal because of the fact that wood dont survive that long, but metal, or bronze, do. So there are more bronze parts (or shields) left.
@@sharkgun2716 Really? With so many people who're alive and who have lived, you don't think multiple people can come up with the same joke without having heard it before?
Whether or not the linothorax was real is entirely based on what your conception of a linothorax is. People across the ancient Mediterranean used linen armor, that is a fact. The question is whether or not it was always stitched or whether glue was used to create a layered composite. Evidence does exist to support this, but leather armor was cheaper and very effective. However linen provided many benefits over leather, which included having boasted a lower weight and greater flexibility. Cont
I made a linothorax with about 20 layers of cotton canvas and some cardboard in the center for padding. Not historically accurate, I know. What I found was that it wouldn’t stop thrusts but it could slow down the knife significantly. Adding even thin brass sheets over the canvas was enough to keep the knife from penetrating. This was definitely the reason for the bronze scale bands many linothoraxes had around the midsection.
Remember that the linen was to be bonded together. If it was bonded together the resulting composite would be very hard to pierce with any knife or sword.
Draw weight doesn't matter. The important variabel is the speed and the mass of the arrow, because a lighter and better produced bow can be stronger than a heavier one
@@ghifarakbar8492 I am almost certain you’re wrong on that the heavier the drawl weight on a bow generally the faster it launches arrows so using the same bro you would then want to figure out the weight of the arrow in the speed it’s going to figure out how hard it would be hitting
@@charlottewalnut3118 if you use the same type of bow with similar profile and using similar arrow then yes, draw weight does matter. but different bow have different characteristic. how the bow taper, weather it has syah or not, how it curve, the material used for the limb, the density of the limbs material, arrow material, arrow weight, type of arrow head and many other variables play part in generating arrow speed.
Correct. However, testing has revealed that arrows fired at long range retain as much as 90% of their initial velocity on impact. So, when I conducted my test I fired it with approximately 10% higher velocity than you would expect from a typical bow of the era. Also, I intentionally aimed at the various parts of the armor. I wanted to get as many samples as possible. I was 30-40ft away - if I wanted I could have stuck every arrow in the center plate (any one halfway decent with a bow can do the same).
@@Hokie2k11 If you really wanted to, you could use a bow that has an arrow velocity at 30ft away similar to the arrow velocity of a bow of the age at a distance common in warfare.
(cont.) it would not be used as a construction material (which it was, in fairly substantial quantities at that). Second, there are many ways in which armor could have had waterproofing qualities added to it (regardless of whether it was linen or not). Don't quote me but I believe some methods included coating the surface with lime or wax. Finally, if I recall correctly most armies didn't traverse large distances wearing armor. Now, to answer some questions about the armor I made.
Correct, they did not have steel arrowheads, which is why I used 100% bronze trilobat(e) arrow heads purchased from a custom smith in Britain. The metallurgy of the bronze arrowheads was specifically developed to faithfully reproduce the physical characteristics of a 4th or 5th century BC Scythian arrowhead, aka as the trilobat(e). That was the only arrowhead I could procure in bronze, so the remaining test had to be conducted using steel.
Linen armour looks like a way of getting even hotter under the Mediterranean sun without substantial protection. I think the linen covered tougher material such as leather.
Thank you for your inquiry. It's been a while since I made the armor, video and report associated with it but I'll answer your question to the best of my ability. The glue was hide glue. Yes, there will be issues with it degrading in wet weather, however the same can be said for glue used in the construction of ancient buildings. I am inclined to believe that if the glue did degrade that fast under those conditions then
(cont.) A generous amount of glue was applied to both sides the linen and the surface before it was adhered. This process was repeated over and over. Once a core was built (about 11 layers with leather underneath) I added the leather border which was hardened in a C shape. Some extra linen was purposely added to the borders of the armor to create a bell shaped profile around which the C shaped profile of the leather border was hardened, securing it all in place. Finally I went ahead and ran
Three of the arrowheads were made from bronze, the remaining from steel. However, if you watch the video you will see that the steel arrowheads were outperformed by the bronze ones. The defining characteristic proved not to be the material from which the arrowheads were made but the profile (shape) of the arrowhead itself. The steel lamellar plates were used since no bronze were available, but only steel arrowheads were fired at the steel plates.
Thanks for posting this! Probably too late, but in your research, you may want to include other linen-based armors of other time periods (ie- European "jacks"). I believe you mentioned using 22 linen layers which is about the same for the average jack of the 14th & 15th centuries. In the "Ordinances" of Louis XI of France, one reads: ". . .and first they must have of said Jacks, 30, or at least 25 folds of cloth and a stag's skin." (Regards from Lynchburg!)
The HUGE weakness I see is a slight draw across the chest cordage on the front will drop your armor, why not secure the shoulder strap on the front and wrap the cord on the back.
Agreed - I would have done many things differently had I had the time. When I made this I was under quite the time crunch, my main concern was getting to a point where I could actually commence with penetration and blunt force testing. I do however feel like I chose the aesthetics of the binding based on some artwork from the era, so there is some basis for the way it is rigged. But yes, had I more time I would have found a more secure method for rigging the yoke.
@@Hokie2k11 I understand a time crunch somewhat, but functionality (if ever needed) would always be my main goal with any project concerning armor or weapons, barring the need of historical wall hangers of course.....Thx for the vid.
(cont.) blunt objects is still decent when wet but I wouldn't be willing to conduct that same test myself! I did continue to add additional layers after I stichted everything together, but this I thought was an equally prudent move. Doing so covered up the seams and helped maintain overall integrity.
@Hokie2k11 There have been archeological finds of layered linen as well as some mention in surviving text, the most notorious of which is the description of a linen cuirass claimed by Alexander after defeating the Persian King Darius III, a description that comes from, if I remember correctly, Plutarch. The real question is, since this armor deteriorates over time and it is very unlikely that any will be found: does the evidence support or reject its existence?
Fan fact the first full plate armor found in Dendra of Greece constructed around 1400bc.War was a typical think in the changing of the ages(Neolithic,copper Iron Age golden age.
(cont.) a seam around the entire tube, top and bottom. Not a fine seam... a very rough seam that was secured with hemp cord, cord which was knotted every few holes to ensure that the entire cord wouldn't come undone if one piece were broke. This was perhaps the most difficult process; I had to take a hammer and nails to punch the holes in the finished cuirass. With a little more foresight I would have punched a hole in the beginning and then repeat as I added each layer of linen. Having said
you said you use animal glue, but what kind hide, bone, fish, or hoof glue? i imagine hide and bone would be more or less the same im not sure about fish since i dont recall the main ingredient there, but hoof glue is keratin, while hide and bone is collagen, keratin being harder than collagen could make it better suited for armour. also was the glue painted on or was the fabric soaked in glue prior to being laminated? also how does the armour handle humidity and heat?
Hardened leather scales like on a brigandine... probably a lot. Properly cured hardened leather is a beast and one of the biggest arguments against hardneded/glued linen armor). It's been a looong time since I did this test, but if I did it again and had my current budget I'd definitely test out different methods of protection. Sadly, if I recall from my research (which I did a ton of at the time), we only have reliable information on a few things from that era. We know the size, shape and mass of the arrow heads and roughly the mass and velocity of the arrows with arrowhead. Sadly most of the actual armor samples degrade over time... they literally just rot/decay, especially the less expensive stuff issued to your regular infantry guy. That said, I do recall people finding samples of leather and linen armor from the 3rd and 4th century bce. I'd probably develop a test campaign based on that, historical imagery and what we know about armor from bordering regions and similar time-frames.... so early Roman leather armor which I'm pretty sure we have more evidence of.
It's easy to forget how long ago this stuff actually dates to. We all know the "dates", but it really puts things into perspective when you consider many old battlefields and cities are now 15-20ft or more under the ground. I want to say the old Royal Quarter Alexandria, Egypt (somethingn like 25 cities were renamed that during his reign lol), the portion founded by Alexander, is around 25-30ft UNDER the current city. So, point being, it's incredibly hard to find stuff from this period.... thank God some folks preserved art and writings from the time and shortly thereafter. To your point though - if I were some soldier, I'd do whatever it took to survive, especially if I was a Macedonian phalanxman without shield... wearing only my tube and yolk armor (linen or leather). You'd see me boiling leather and slapping all kinds of extra protection on it... I imagine troops of the era did the same. I'd be fighting for the belly hide of every cow and horse we slaughtered 😂
(cont.) that I never had an issue with the glue delaminating. Ever. The leather would become more flexible but thats about it. Interesting... and not all that suprising, the armor was even more effective when wet (wet, not soaked... I did't drop it in a lake!) It absorbed an arrows energy more efficiently. Bone dry it is very stiff, stiff enough to absorb a baseball bat swung straight at your gut. I'm sure it's effectiveness against
I liked the testing. Would be nice to see you stab it with an arming sword while having it placed on a wooden rack to hold it up weight down with about 90 kilo and show the penetration? What kind of people would of been able to afford this armor? Would it of been something that they would make for themselves or buy? is it difficult to make? What type of glue would have they used? - A lot of questions I know :D
Thanks, appreciate it. A bronze sword would probably cut into the linen and leather, but not through it. A bronze sword thrust into it - it'd go straight through it. Same goes for a spear. BUT, this goes for most armor - most armor simply isn't designed to defeat thrusting attacks from weapons like swords and spears. It's one of the reasons maces are so damn effective - you get the piercing effect of a thrust with a slashing attack. It is however EXTREMELY effective at absorbing blunt attacks. My brother played collegiate baseball. I had him take a pretty good whack at me in the chest while I was wearing it. Same for attacks to the sides. As for who would make it... it's been a while since I did research into this but I recall there being different methods of acquiring it based on who you were and when you are talking about. The Greeks were citizen soldiers, I believe many of them owned their own armor and weapons. The Macedonians however, under Alexander, had a standing army... a pretty sizable one at that. They had a standing army and garrisons in dozens of cities. Those soldiers most certainly did not pay for their armor, and I do recall reading something in Plutarch to that effect. Also, it would not necessarily be cheap to make, but it wouldn't be prohibitively expensive. The real advantage to this armor is that its easy to repair, maintain, and becomes flexible as you sweat... and it doesn't lose much of its defensive properties in the process (perhaps less effective against blunt I suppose). It's not difficult to make at all, you just need a bunch of flax linen and glue. Linen wasn't cheap, but it wasn't rare either.
@@Hokie2k11 Hmm.. well I wouldn't imagine it would be very accessable for lots of men who became soldiers.. There were lots of men who went to battle with a bronze plate on their chest and little else. The citizen soldiers of greece had land if I'm not mistaken but it didn't prevent you from being a soldier as long as you didn't live in Spartan lands. You wouldn't be permitted amongst the hoplites, but I imagine you could form part of a skirmisher unit. Armour was always the most expensive part of your kit. All of this though, doesn't stop this armour from being extremely interesting!
I dont think you can repair it. Once the linen is pierced, that's it. It may lasted enough for a battle, but that's it. You would have to buy another one afterwards. Its like Kevlar. Once it was pieced, you have to get another. But, it would keep you alive for quite a while.
in our historical reconstruction clubs little money. it is necessary to repair, that have torn at trainings or games. We put patches of leather or metal plates.
I wondered this myself after I did the testing in the video. In addition, I wanted to know if excessive perspiration, from the inside out if you will, made a difference. To test this I wore the armor for hours at a time on several occasions, during which time I performed exercises, yard work, and walking (yes, I looked goof) in both good and bad weather (light-medium rain for extended periods). The armor definitely retained water from both the perspiration and rain... but not as much water as you'd expect. I attribute this primarily to the fact that the generous amount of glue I used saturated the linen before the rain. It also dried faster than expected, likely for the same reason - not as much water had been absorbed. Finally, I did some post exercise/rain testing. The results were almost identical to the ones in the video, except in a couple locations where it appears the armor faired even better when wet. I'm guessing this has to do with it absorbing the energy of the arrow better before giving... better bend than break if you will. The only thing I didn't test was blunt impacts while wet - I don't imagine it would fair as well there as it did when it was dry.
This 'historical' terminology was undoubtedly accepted and used in some cultures, in certain time periods, but it certainly was not a universal term in archery. Over the millenia, many cultures developed bows independently. We simply have no way of knowing all the terminology used. Yet today, anyone not versed in archery terms will say the equivalent of "fire", and everyone will understand what they mean.
Not really. There have only ever been even a few samples of the material found, let alone a complete example. It's difficult to say how they would have made it, but I don't think they would have used more than one layer of leather. At that point you might just consider making it entirely out of leather. If anything, I could see someone trying to make it entirely out of linen. I did however use leather, but only for the core and trimmings, and it wasn't a terribly thick piece of leather. My goal was to create a piece of armor that was flexible, not obscenely heavy, did not require hours and hours of stitching, and could be repaired in the field. In this respect I succeeded.
Bow Weight: I did not record the weight of the bow used but instead chronographed the arrows used in the test as well as the mass of the arrows. I tried my best to match the weight and velocity to what we know about recurve bows in use at the time. The mass (grams/grains) and velocities (feet per second) are: Scythian: 24/370, 172 Tanged Broadhead:49/756, 146 Saxon Broadhead: 43/664, 152 This information is provided in the video.
@Hokie2k11 Part 3: To examine whether there was evidence in support of or against the existence of a laminated linen cuirass I asked two questions: 1) Did inhabitants of the ancient Mediterranean ever develop a glue/linen laminated composite and 2) Did they use layered linen armor of any kind, glue or not? The answer is yes to both. I have already spoken of the layered armor, but the glue/linen composite is also well known of, Greeks made mask for plays while Egyptians made burial masks.
You need for make it. Depending on the part of the armor in question, it's between 15-25 layers of historically accurate linen, bonded with the animal based glue used at the time. You can add even more protection if you line the inside with hardened leather.
@@Hokie2k11 It would be really cool, it would be very difficult to do it for an inexperienced like me, do you know if anyone can forge this linen army?
@Hokie2k11 Part 4: Finally, though expensive, glue was fairly common in the ancient world. It was used for many purposes, not the least of which was in the construction of wood buildings. Having proven the coexistence of layered linen armor AND glue/linen composites, there is substantial evidence in supporting the existence of a glue/linen cuirass. I do not believe they were common, I imagine leather was the dominant material used, but for those that could afford glue and linen, why not?
I can't recall the manufacturer, but the bow was your typical adjustable compound hunting bow. However, the important thing is to make sure you have the right arrow of the correct weight and with the correct arrow head leaving the bow at the right velocity. I used a variety of arrows, but I would focus primarily on the Scythian trilobat. Before firing, I adjusted the draw weight (force) of the bow to ensure I had the right velocity.
In hindsight, that's a fair assessment lol. At the time, it felt like a perfectly normal thing to do on the outskirts of Blacksburg, VA. Things are... or at least were... a little different down there.
Cuirass' were made from hardened leather and the linen material found in a mycenaean burial was much earlier than the Greek cuirasses which is what mislead many historians and people that now believe they're made from linen but actually that's false. Just trying to help.
(cont)which tend to degrade animal glue. if the armour cannot handle heat and humidity well it won't hold up in combat (even in a cool dry environment sweat and body heat alone could do it in) same for if it can't hold up in the rain (people fought in the rain too, cus if one says we won't fight in the rain and the other says we will fight in the rain...that guy wins)
The historical descriptions of 'linen armour' gave rise to the modern terminology. We obviously don't know for certain, the specific term used by the ancient cultures who wore such armour, so a name was created. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There ARE historical references and indications of it's use. Enough to justify research in to possible construction methods and effectiveness. We know other cultures used layered/laminated textile armour, Gambeson being the most recognisable, because they were effective.
Cool test, but the arrow speeds you are getting I feel like wouldn't be accurate to archaic or ancient greek arrow speeds. modern composite laminated bows can get up to 200 fps with lighter arrows, and maybe 150-170 with actual heavier war arrows *this isnt including flight bows*. A composite bow, like a scythian wouldn't get those speeds, their draw length was significantly shorter compared to modern asiatic composite bows, like they could maybe pull 28" though most historical depictions on vases and stuff show them with relatively short draw lengths. So i'd think they'd be getting 150fps with lighter arrows than 130-140 with heavier war arrows maybe even less. Though because of this I feel like they would rely on even lighter arrows which would be mass and generate less energy. Also these shots are relatively close so they won't be angling as they and deflecting off armor easier *since bows back than didn't have as flat as a trajectory especially past 35-40 yards* , compared to a flat trajectory shot. Though I understand it looks like you're in an apartment area? So it would be dangerous to shoot any further.
Appreciate it. Yeah, this was 13-14 years ago - assembled it as part of an undergraduate research project. Worked with what I had on a students budget. Tried to use all the legit materials but time and money was always a thing. As for the velocity - I can't remember everything that had me decide those were the right numbers to replicate, but every aspect of this was historically researched to be as accurate as possible (given my limitations). I think part of it was that we have semi-reliable (ish?) data on how far the bows could shoot, you can roughly infer the velocity at release, especially if you also have reliable data on the dimensions, composition and mass of the arrow (so enough to assess how well it retains velocity throughout its flight, which i feel like is over 90% for 4th century BC trilobat tipped arrows)... but its been over a decade), which we definitely do. That said, again, I was a student on a budget and had a tight schedule to meet.... I'm sure someone else (to include myself now) could do an even better test without those limitations. I know I love coming on youtube and watching those types of videos, love em, even if most focus on metal armor as opposed to the linen, leather and alternatives (eg wood)!
I'll say this - against something like a more modern (historically speaking) recurve or English longbow, none of this armor would stand up without something extra. I think it would have been a nice type of armor to have in all weather, especially hot and humid (it only got more flexible), and was super easy to patch, it had its limits. That said, I later tried it with a thicker, hardened leather core/tube with the same layers and it entirely stopped the trilobat tipped arrows, even with a FULL strength modern hunting bow - that surprised the shit out of me.
Kind of like gambeson on crack Slashes resisted by gambeson and with this they wont do too way too much more than maille Stabs resisted by gambeson also adding more stuff between you and a penetrating head that needs to be larger to reach you, with this it does it better
That's an intersting observation and one that was born out in testing. I didn't post the video of it when I made this so many years back, but there was an interesting dynamic when it got wet from weather (and may have exhibited similiar characteristics due to insane sweat?). When it was dry, it was more rigid, so even with a softer leather core, it had great stopping power against piercing as well as resisted full swings from a baseball bat. However, when it was wet it would swell some, the thickness increasing and it becoming more pliable. While the arrows pierced further and it weighed more, it also had the benefit of being thicker (so could absorb more arrowhead before reaching the core of medium leather) as well as more flexible... more comfortable to move in. So, wet or dry, it performed well.... for different reasons.
The chances of hitting someone from point blank range without a shield and without him turning his body are basically 0% so you don't get a lot of information out of this. (maybe if you make it turn around slowly/fast somehow)
Show your research to back up your claims. Define point blank range. Why would they be be turning their body whilst coming toward you or moving away? Shields can be damaged and become unusable, or even be wrestled from you in combat. They can only point in one direction at a time, which may not be the direction the arrow comes from. Care to change your mind?
Incorrect. And short of one or two fragments, we have no real evidence of them using leather either. Those fragments could be from ceremonial armour, such as that found in Tutankhamun's tomb.
The most important is the angle of the shot...Usually on a battlefield archers shot volleys of arrows from a long distance. And they aimed high so the arrow gained height and then with its weight and speed it fell on the enemy. So i think its kinetic energy and m/sec wasnt that deadly or powerful as a straight shot or from a high tower/wall shooting downwards... in other words only at a clear sight and a straight zero angle the arrows could penetrate an armor and that was a rare scenario... Otherwise Alexanders phalanxes would have huge casualties because every single one of those hundreds of thousands Persian soldiers they fought against, carried a bow
From what I understand arrow volleys were closer since arrows actually lose velocity if shot at long distance, as well as range. Also since Alexanders phalanxes rely on heavy shields the armor seems more likely to have been a secondary measure rather than the primary protection
@@bmxdoe I'll have to go look into my research at some point, but I recall more than one source stating that the velocity of arrows fired by English longbows retained as much as 90% of their velocity on impact, despite the huge distance and massive arc. This may not be a perfect carry over to ancient times, but it seemed like a nice starting point and the basis for me choosing a test velocity.
Angle of the shot would definitely have an effect here and not something I considered. Why? I was thinking worse case scenario and only had so many shots before I completely trashed my pride and joy :) I figured that the 'effective' thickness is higher for angled shots, so my straight on tests were what one would have to encounter if soldiers were engaged up close and personal. I figured that if they could survive up close and personal than they'd survive angled shots from a distance. In the end though the armor did its job. They may have penetrated some, but none would have been a kill shot. If I had to go through this test myself, I can tell you what I would do - I'd just wear some type of fur or layering that separated the armor from my body by about 1/3 to 1/2 of an inch. After all, it wasn't as if something inside the armor stopped the arrows from going deeper, there was nothing more than a pillow inside - all of those arrows were stopped by the armor.
Also, on a sidenote. Would it stop the ultimate super-weapon of the medieval world, The Katana? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this deep philosophical subject.
Man... The Katana is just another sword. It isnt better in anyway whatsoever. It doesnt cut more, it doesnt pierce more... It is just too much oversold. (That being said, The Katana is one of my favorite swords, but it isnt a superweapon.) In fact, Samurai used more spears, polearms and bows more often than swords. The Swords was the last ditch weapon. A good spearman could just kill you faster and better than another swordsman... But its the perfect weapon if you want a quick draw and stuff like that.
@KunTao Lai Lai In the "peaceful" edo period the katana/wakizashi were like a badge saying " i work for the shogun dont mess with me ! if you do i will cut you in half to forgive you" .
Try using leather. For many reasons, linen is just not practical as armor due to the logistics behind getting enough of it to make armor. Tanned leather is far far more common, far easier to make, and makes much more sense than something so very expensive.
The practicality depends on use, however. One of the reasons I'm researching the linothorax and south Indian Peti armor is because I live in an area of Texas that' has an Mediterranean climate- even walking around, much less marching and fighting, heat exhaustion is a real problem. Since he was often on the march during the hot season, this was a huge issue. Leather armor is HOT.
Bippy Grace Linen was historically in very short supply, and was quite expensive. To get any sort of protection, you need a lot of layers of it. Beyond that, the evidence for linen armor just isn't there.
demomanchaos My understanding is that there's written accounts of it, as well as the linen and silk armor traditions of India (thousand nail coats, Peti armor) and the far east, with which there was some cultural exchange by the time of Alexander. As well as the later viking cloth +fur armor for those that couldn't afford maile (where cloth was expensive enough it was used as a huge mark of trade, almost a currency), and later European cloth armor traditions. Also, having fleshed a hide and having woven linen, linen is easier to work with. Hand woven fabric was also expensive, and tanning and rhetting linen both stink to high heaven. I'm probably going to try to make both forms- leather armor and linen- and just see how they perform in the heat out here.
Bippy Grace Those armors are quite different to the ancient Greek style though. Those are actually gambesons, padded armor. made from wool or cotton generally. They are hotter and work on very different principles to hardened leather. From what I understand, the only literary reference to linen armor is something along the lines of"linen corseted argives" which is quite vague. Facing something in linen is one thing, making hard armor entirely out of linen is another.
demomanchaos Unfortunatley there is very little evidence of Leather armour that is'nt within the realms of Knightly tournaments or Fetish bondage outfits. Hoplites were also the rich members of society so wouldnt have settled for a shittier armour just because It may have been more expensive they would want to be able to show off and Brazenly shout to the Enemy "look at me I dont give a shit about expense and I want to kill you" Im in favour of the "sandwich" Idea where there is a chunk of layered Linen, then a layer of Leather (for stability and holding a shape, then a further chunk of layered Linen for extra protection, comfort and breath ability. However this is just my opinion.
The type of bow I used (a compound hunting bow) is irrelevant, what's important is the velocity and type of arrow and arrow head used. For this test I used real bronze trilobat arrow heads made by a smith in the UK. I affixed these to everyday wood / carbon hunting arrows, which I then weighted to ensure the final mass was as close to being historically accurate as possible.
The final step was to use a chronograph (measures the velocity of the arrow) to tune the bow so it fired the arrows at the correct velocity.
With a compound bow you get better scientific results, since the draw weight will be very consistent. Thank you for this presentation and your work. If you ever cared to repeat it with the TH-cam ballistic standard of pork ribs and orange stuffing, I'd be interested in if these penetrating arrows lose depth of penetration. There's also the fact your shots are worst-case for the target. Shots falling onto the target in plunging fire may be more this armor's intention to defeat. Even so, it seems a good flak-jacket for the common grunt.
It's most likely made for moderate protection from melee damage - not arrows which is the intent of the large round hoplite metal shield. It's probably made to be lightweight and offer good mobility for the wearer.
I wouldn't be so sure. While I would much prefer a shield myself, armor provides very little defense against spears, which was the definitive weapon of the era. its really academic, but my testing has shown that it does in fact provide protection from arrows. That being the case, I would think it was used with that in mind (even if it also provides protection from melee attacks).
Also, Alexander the Great's army did not carry hoplon into battle. They wielded two-handed sarissas. They did have a telamon shield though, named for the method of securing it, which involved strapping a small aspis to the left shoulder. I suppose they could raise it up to protect the front of their bodies from incoming arrows.
I also have read that linothorax may have been supplemented with plate/scale segments and definitely with a metal helm.
the hoplon was a wooden shield
Sonhante Sonhador Also a good point. Though the better ones were sheeted with bronze or rimmed with iron or steel.
@@bellgrand Right, i think most people belive that they were metal because of the fact that wood dont survive that long, but metal, or bronze, do. So there are more bronze parts (or shields) left.
alexander the great is depicted as wearing a linothorax.
Spandex*
Crusader of the Low Lands Very funny, I laughed at this original joke
@@sharkgun2716 Really? With so many people who're alive and who have lived, you don't think multiple people can come up with the same joke without having heard it before?
Crusader of the Low Lands refer to my original comment
His was probably reenforced with bronze scales
Whether or not the linothorax was real is entirely based on what your conception of a linothorax is. People across the ancient Mediterranean used linen armor, that is a fact. The question is whether or not it was always stitched or whether glue was used to create a layered composite. Evidence does exist to support this, but leather armor was cheaper and very effective. However linen provided many benefits over leather, which included having boasted a lower weight and greater flexibility. Cont
I made a linothorax with about 20 layers of cotton canvas and some cardboard in the center for padding. Not historically accurate, I know.
What I found was that it wouldn’t stop thrusts but it could slow down the knife significantly. Adding even thin brass sheets over the canvas was enough to keep the knife from penetrating.
This was definitely the reason for the bronze scale bands many linothoraxes had around the midsection.
Remember that the linen was to be bonded together. If it was bonded together the resulting composite would be very hard to pierce with any knife or sword.
How heavy is the bow's draw weight and what's the distance you are shooting from?
Draw weight doesn't matter. The important variabel is the speed and the mass of the arrow, because a lighter and better produced bow can be stronger than a heavier one
@@ghifarakbar8492 I am almost certain you’re wrong on that the heavier the drawl weight on a bow generally the faster it launches arrows so using the same bro you would then want to figure out the weight of the arrow in the speed it’s going to figure out how hard it would be hitting
@@charlottewalnut3118 if you use the same type of bow with similar profile and using similar arrow then yes, draw weight does matter. but different bow have different characteristic. how the bow taper, weather it has syah or not, how it curve, the material used for the limb, the density of the limbs material, arrow material, arrow weight, type of arrow head and many other variables play part in generating arrow speed.
I imagine he was firing from much closer then would be typical combat ranges.
Correct. However, testing has revealed that arrows fired at long range retain as much as 90% of their initial velocity on impact. So, when I conducted my test I fired it with approximately 10% higher velocity than you would expect from a typical bow of the era.
Also, I intentionally aimed at the various parts of the armor. I wanted to get as many samples as possible. I was 30-40ft away - if I wanted I could have stuck every arrow in the center plate (any one halfway decent with a bow can do the same).
@@Hokie2k11 If you really wanted to, you could use a bow that has an arrow velocity at 30ft away similar to the arrow velocity of a bow of the age at a distance common in warfare.
(cont.) it would not be used as a construction material (which it was, in fairly substantial quantities at that). Second, there are many ways in which armor could have had waterproofing qualities added to it (regardless of whether it was linen or not). Don't quote me but I believe some methods included coating the surface with lime or wax. Finally, if I recall correctly most armies didn't traverse large distances wearing armor. Now, to answer some questions about the armor I made.
Correct, they did not have steel arrowheads, which is why I used 100% bronze trilobat(e) arrow heads purchased from a custom smith in Britain. The metallurgy of the bronze arrowheads was specifically developed to faithfully reproduce the physical characteristics of a 4th or 5th century BC Scythian arrowhead, aka as the trilobat(e). That was the only arrowhead I could procure in bronze, so the remaining test had to be conducted using steel.
Linen armour looks like a way of getting even hotter under the Mediterranean sun without substantial protection. I think the linen covered tougher material such as leather.
Great review,often wondered about this armour
Thank you for your inquiry. It's been a while since I made the armor, video and report associated with it but I'll answer your question to the best of my ability.
The glue was hide glue. Yes, there will be issues with it degrading in wet weather, however the same can be said for glue used in the construction of ancient buildings. I am inclined to believe that if the glue did degrade that fast under those conditions then
Thanks for this. Was great and the strung together mail belt is amazing 👏🏼
(cont.) A generous amount of glue was applied to both sides the linen and the surface before it was adhered. This process was repeated over and over. Once a core was built (about 11 layers with leather underneath) I added the leather border which was hardened in a C shape. Some extra linen was purposely added to the borders of the armor to create a bell shaped profile around which the C shaped profile of the leather border was hardened, securing it all in place. Finally I went ahead and ran
Three of the arrowheads were made from bronze, the remaining from steel. However, if you watch the video you will see that the steel arrowheads were outperformed by the bronze ones. The defining characteristic proved not to be the material from which the arrowheads were made but the profile (shape) of the arrowhead itself. The steel lamellar plates were used since no bronze were available, but only steel arrowheads were fired at the steel plates.
Thanks for posting this! Probably too late, but in your research, you may want to include other linen-based armors of other time periods (ie- European "jacks"). I believe you mentioned using 22 linen layers which is about the same for the average jack of the 14th & 15th centuries. In the "Ordinances" of Louis XI of France, one reads: ". . .and first they must have of said Jacks, 30, or at least 25 folds of cloth and a stag's skin." (Regards from Lynchburg!)
This seems to be simple, yet very effective armor.
The HUGE weakness I see is a slight draw across the chest cordage on the front will drop your armor, why not secure the shoulder strap on the front and wrap the cord on the back.
Agreed - I would have done many things differently had I had the time. When I made this I was under quite the time crunch, my main concern was getting to a point where I could actually commence with penetration and blunt force testing.
I do however feel like I chose the aesthetics of the binding based on some artwork from the era, so there is some basis for the way it is rigged. But yes, had I more time I would have found a more secure method for rigging the yoke.
@@Hokie2k11 I understand a time crunch somewhat, but functionality (if ever needed) would always be my main goal with any project concerning armor or weapons, barring the need of historical wall hangers of course.....Thx for the vid.
(cont.) blunt objects is still decent when wet but I wouldn't be willing to conduct that same test myself! I did continue to add additional layers after I stichted everything together, but this I thought was an equally prudent move. Doing so covered up the seams and helped maintain overall integrity.
@Hokie2k11
There have been archeological finds of layered linen as well as some mention in surviving text, the most notorious of which is the description of a linen cuirass claimed by Alexander after defeating the Persian King Darius III, a description that comes from, if I remember correctly, Plutarch. The real question is, since this armor deteriorates over time and it is very unlikely that any will be found: does the evidence support or reject its existence?
Fan fact the first full plate armor found in Dendra of Greece constructed around 1400bc.War was a typical think in the changing of the ages(Neolithic,copper Iron Age golden age.
Thank you for this video and your comments below.
(cont.) a seam around the entire tube, top and bottom. Not a fine seam... a very rough seam that was secured with hemp cord, cord which was knotted every few holes to ensure that the entire cord wouldn't come undone if one piece were broke. This was perhaps the most difficult process; I had to take a hammer and nails to punch the holes in the finished cuirass. With a little more foresight I would have punched a hole in the beginning and then repeat as I added each layer of linen. Having said
you said you use animal glue, but what kind hide, bone, fish, or hoof glue?
i imagine hide and bone would be more or less the same im not sure about fish since i dont recall the main ingredient there, but hoof glue is keratin, while hide and bone is collagen, keratin being harder than collagen could make it better suited for armour.
also was the glue painted on or was the fabric soaked in glue prior to being laminated?
also how does the armour handle humidity and heat?
Is it modern linen or was it handspun and hand processed?
1:22 Great arrow grouping! :)
I wonder how much extra protection a thin layer of leather scale would add to this?
Hardened leather scales like on a brigandine... probably a lot. Properly cured hardened leather is a beast and one of the biggest arguments against hardneded/glued linen armor). It's been a looong time since I did this test, but if I did it again and had my current budget I'd definitely test out different methods of protection.
Sadly, if I recall from my research (which I did a ton of at the time), we only have reliable information on a few things from that era. We know the size, shape and mass of the arrow heads and roughly the mass and velocity of the arrows with arrowhead. Sadly most of the actual armor samples degrade over time... they literally just rot/decay, especially the less expensive stuff issued to your regular infantry guy.
That said, I do recall people finding samples of leather and linen armor from the 3rd and 4th century bce. I'd probably develop a test campaign based on that, historical imagery and what we know about armor from bordering regions and similar time-frames.... so early Roman leather armor which I'm pretty sure we have more evidence of.
It's easy to forget how long ago this stuff actually dates to. We all know the "dates", but it really puts things into perspective when you consider many old battlefields and cities are now 15-20ft or more under the ground. I want to say the old Royal Quarter Alexandria, Egypt (somethingn like 25 cities were renamed that during his reign lol), the portion founded by Alexander, is around 25-30ft UNDER the current city. So, point being, it's incredibly hard to find stuff from this period.... thank God some folks preserved art and writings from the time and shortly thereafter.
To your point though - if I were some soldier, I'd do whatever it took to survive, especially if I was a Macedonian phalanxman without shield... wearing only my tube and yolk armor (linen or leather). You'd see me boiling leather and slapping all kinds of extra protection on it... I imagine troops of the era did the same. I'd be fighting for the belly hide of every cow and horse we slaughtered 😂
@@Hokie2k11 Thanks for the replies! 👍👍
Great video dude🤙🏻
(cont.) that I never had an issue with the glue delaminating. Ever. The leather would become more flexible but thats about it. Interesting... and not all that suprising, the armor was even more effective when wet (wet, not soaked... I did't drop it in a lake!) It absorbed an arrows energy more efficiently. Bone dry it is very stiff, stiff enough to absorb a baseball bat swung straight at your gut. I'm sure it's effectiveness against
I liked the testing. Would be nice to see you stab it with an arming sword while having it placed on a wooden rack to hold it up weight down with about 90 kilo and show the penetration? What kind of people would of been able to afford this armor? Would it of been something that they would make for themselves or buy? is it difficult to make? What type of glue would have they used? - A lot of questions I know :D
Thanks, appreciate it.
A bronze sword would probably cut into the linen and leather, but not through it. A bronze sword thrust into it - it'd go straight through it. Same goes for a spear. BUT, this goes for most armor - most armor simply isn't designed to defeat thrusting attacks from weapons like swords and spears. It's one of the reasons maces are so damn effective - you get the piercing effect of a thrust with a slashing attack.
It is however EXTREMELY effective at absorbing blunt attacks. My brother played collegiate baseball. I had him take a pretty good whack at me in the chest while I was wearing it. Same for attacks to the sides.
As for who would make it... it's been a while since I did research into this but I recall there being different methods of acquiring it based on who you were and when you are talking about. The Greeks were citizen soldiers, I believe many of them owned their own armor and weapons. The Macedonians however, under Alexander, had a standing army... a pretty sizable one at that. They had a standing army and garrisons in dozens of cities. Those soldiers most certainly did not pay for their armor, and I do recall reading something in Plutarch to that effect.
Also, it would not necessarily be cheap to make, but it wouldn't be prohibitively expensive. The real advantage to this armor is that its easy to repair, maintain, and becomes flexible as you sweat... and it doesn't lose much of its defensive properties in the process (perhaps less effective against blunt I suppose). It's not difficult to make at all, you just need a bunch of flax linen and glue. Linen wasn't cheap, but it wasn't rare either.
@@Hokie2k11 Hmm.. well I wouldn't imagine it would be very accessable for lots of men who became soldiers.. There were lots of men who went to battle with a bronze plate on their chest and little else. The citizen soldiers of greece had land if I'm not mistaken but it didn't prevent you from being a soldier as long as you didn't live in Spartan lands. You wouldn't be permitted amongst the hoplites, but I imagine you could form part of a skirmisher unit. Armour was always the most expensive part of your kit. All of this though, doesn't stop this armour from being extremely interesting!
Simple question: if i want to build a linothorax and use it in a test like this, how can i repair my armor after the mess? Thanks :)
I dont think you can repair it. Once the linen is pierced, that's it. It may lasted enough for a battle, but that's it. You would have to buy another one afterwards.
Its like Kevlar. Once it was pieced, you have to get another. But, it would keep you alive for quite a while.
in our historical reconstruction clubs little money. it is necessary to repair, that have torn at trainings or games. We put patches of leather or metal plates.
Since it is made of Linen or flax you can restich it the same way you would a tear, layer by layer.
Question...... what about silk instead of linen.....?
What was the draw weight on the bow?
Will that armor get heavier on the rain ? It’s basically thick clotting
The material was probably waxed to make it water repellent.
I wondered this myself after I did the testing in the video. In addition, I wanted to know if excessive perspiration, from the inside out if you will, made a difference. To test this I wore the armor for hours at a time on several occasions, during which time I performed exercises, yard work, and walking (yes, I looked goof) in both good and bad weather (light-medium rain for extended periods). The armor definitely retained water from both the perspiration and rain... but not as much water as you'd expect. I attribute this primarily to the fact that the generous amount of glue I used saturated the linen before the rain. It also dried faster than expected, likely for the same reason - not as much water had been absorbed. Finally, I did some post exercise/rain testing. The results were almost identical to the ones in the video, except in a couple locations where it appears the armor faired even better when wet. I'm guessing this has to do with it absorbing the energy of the arrow better before giving... better bend than break if you will. The only thing I didn't test was blunt impacts while wet - I don't imagine it would fair as well there as it did when it was dry.
Really cool!
I don't know man, i saw another video where every arow bounced off...
Etienne Ouellet not true, arrows can pierce it , that why people used the bronze shield (Aegis)
You dont fire an arrow. It is loosed.
or shot
This 'historical' terminology was undoubtedly accepted and used in some cultures, in certain time periods, but it certainly was not a universal term in archery. Over the millenia, many cultures developed bows independently. We simply have no way of knowing all the terminology used. Yet today, anyone not versed in archery terms will say the equivalent of "fire", and everyone will understand what they mean.
@@another3997 'fire' being die to firing the charge in a firearm. The terminology doesn't translate to a bow
isn't a piece of leather supposed to be in between layers?
Not really. There have only ever been even a few samples of the material found, let alone a complete example. It's difficult to say how they would have made it, but I don't think they would have used more than one layer of leather. At that point you might just consider making it entirely out of leather. If anything, I could see someone trying to make it entirely out of linen.
I did however use leather, but only for the core and trimmings, and it wasn't a terribly thick piece of leather. My goal was to create a piece of armor that was flexible, not obscenely heavy, did not require hours and hours of stitching, and could be repaired in the field. In this respect I succeeded.
Bow Weight: I did not record the weight of the bow used but instead chronographed the arrows used in the test as well as the mass of the arrows. I tried my best to match the weight and velocity to what we know about recurve bows in use at the time. The mass (grams/grains) and velocities (feet per second) are:
Scythian: 24/370, 172
Tanged Broadhead:49/756, 146
Saxon Broadhead: 43/664, 152
This information is provided in the video.
Excellent
@Hokie2k11
Part 3:
To examine whether there was evidence in support of or against the existence of a laminated linen cuirass I asked two questions: 1) Did inhabitants of the ancient Mediterranean ever develop a glue/linen laminated composite and 2) Did they use layered linen armor of any kind, glue or not? The answer is yes to both. I have already spoken of the layered armor, but the glue/linen composite is also well known of, Greeks made mask for plays while Egyptians made burial masks.
Where could you get this linothorax?
You need for make it. Depending on the part of the armor in question, it's between 15-25 layers of historically accurate linen, bonded with the animal based glue used at the time. You can add even more protection if you line the inside with hardened leather.
@@Hokie2k11 It would be really cool, it would be very difficult to do it for an inexperienced like me, do you know if anyone can forge this linen army?
@@Hokie2k11 I hope you answer me, I would be very curious and happy to be able to have a linothorax
This the armour the back rank reserve of a phalanx would have worn 😂
i want to buy this ,where can i find it?
@Hokie2k11
Part 4:
Finally, though expensive, glue was fairly common in the ancient world. It was used for many purposes, not the least of which was in the construction of wood buildings. Having proven the coexistence of layered linen armor AND glue/linen composites, there is substantial evidence in supporting the existence of a glue/linen cuirass. I do not believe they were common, I imagine leather was the dominant material used, but for those that could afford glue and linen, why not?
You're missing the metal flaps at the waist.
And what kind of bow were you using?
I can't recall the manufacturer, but the bow was your typical adjustable compound hunting bow. However, the important thing is to make sure you have the right arrow of the correct weight and with the correct arrow head leaving the bow at the right velocity. I used a variety of arrows, but I would focus primarily on the Scythian trilobat. Before firing, I adjusted the draw weight (force) of the bow to ensure I had the right velocity.
Bows back then weren't the super powered ones found later on, like in the middle ages.
Was this linothorax made the same way the Greeks and Italians made theirs?
How has no one commented on the fact that he's shooting in essentially a residential area? Nice test, but shouldn't you be at a legit range?
In hindsight, that's a fair assessment lol. At the time, it felt like a perfectly normal thing to do on the outskirts of Blacksburg, VA. Things are... or at least were... a little different down there.
No arrows were fired.
Cuirass' were made from hardened leather and the linen material found in a mycenaean burial was much earlier than the Greek cuirasses which is what mislead many historians and people that now believe they're made from linen but actually that's false. Just trying to help.
Thats a sidewalk behind that tree and someones house
It looks like they should have done 12 layers. 😰
(cont)which tend to degrade animal glue. if the armour cannot handle heat and humidity well it won't hold up in combat (even in a cool dry environment sweat and body heat alone could do it in) same for if it can't hold up in the rain (people fought in the rain too, cus if one says we won't fight in the rain and the other says we will fight in the rain...that guy wins)
@bandiroto "linothorax" is a modern word, so using it as evidence that they used linen is hilariously backwards.
The historical descriptions of 'linen armour' gave rise to the modern terminology. We obviously don't know for certain, the specific term used by the ancient cultures who wore such armour, so a name was created. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There ARE historical references and indications of it's use. Enough to justify research in to possible construction methods and effectiveness. We know other cultures used layered/laminated textile armour, Gambeson being the most recognisable, because they were effective.
Cool test, but the arrow speeds you are getting I feel like wouldn't be accurate to archaic or ancient greek arrow speeds. modern composite laminated bows can get up to 200 fps with lighter arrows, and maybe 150-170 with actual heavier war arrows *this isnt including flight bows*. A composite bow, like a scythian wouldn't get those speeds, their draw length was significantly shorter compared to modern asiatic composite bows, like they could maybe pull 28" though most historical depictions on vases and stuff show them with relatively short draw lengths. So i'd think they'd be getting 150fps with lighter arrows than 130-140 with heavier war arrows maybe even less. Though because of this I feel like they would rely on even lighter arrows which would be mass and generate less energy. Also these shots are relatively close so they won't be angling as they and deflecting off armor easier *since bows back than didn't have as flat as a trajectory especially past 35-40 yards* , compared to a flat trajectory shot. Though I understand it looks like you're in an apartment area? So it would be dangerous to shoot any further.
Appreciate it. Yeah, this was 13-14 years ago - assembled it as part of an undergraduate research project. Worked with what I had on a students budget. Tried to use all the legit materials but time and money was always a thing.
As for the velocity - I can't remember everything that had me decide those were the right numbers to replicate, but every aspect of this was historically researched to be as accurate as possible (given my limitations). I think part of it was that we have semi-reliable (ish?) data on how far the bows could shoot, you can roughly infer the velocity at release, especially if you also have reliable data on the dimensions, composition and mass of the arrow (so enough to assess how well it retains velocity throughout its flight, which i feel like is over 90% for 4th century BC trilobat tipped arrows)... but its been over a decade), which we definitely do.
That said, again, I was a student on a budget and had a tight schedule to meet.... I'm sure someone else (to include myself now) could do an even better test without those limitations. I know I love coming on youtube and watching those types of videos, love em, even if most focus on metal armor as opposed to the linen, leather and alternatives (eg wood)!
I'll say this - against something like a more modern (historically speaking) recurve or English longbow, none of this armor would stand up without something extra. I think it would have been a nice type of armor to have in all weather, especially hot and humid (it only got more flexible), and was super easy to patch, it had its limits.
That said, I later tried it with a thicker, hardened leather core/tube with the same layers and it entirely stopped the trilobat tipped arrows, even with a FULL strength modern hunting bow - that surprised the shit out of me.
Kind of like gambeson on crack
Slashes resisted by gambeson and with this they wont do too way too much more than maille
Stabs resisted by gambeson also adding more stuff between you and a penetrating head that needs to be larger to reach you, with this it does it better
That's an intersting observation and one that was born out in testing. I didn't post the video of it when I made this so many years back, but there was an interesting dynamic when it got wet from weather (and may have exhibited similiar characteristics due to insane sweat?). When it was dry, it was more rigid, so even with a softer leather core, it had great stopping power against piercing as well as resisted full swings from a baseball bat. However, when it was wet it would swell some, the thickness increasing and it becoming more pliable. While the arrows pierced further and it weighed more, it also had the benefit of being thicker (so could absorb more arrowhead before reaching the core of medium leather) as well as more flexible... more comfortable to move in. So, wet or dry, it performed well.... for different reasons.
Try raw hide instead of leather you might be surprised by the results.
Well hardened leather
The chances of hitting someone from point blank range without a shield and without him turning his body are basically 0% so you don't get a lot of information out of this. (maybe if you make it turn around slowly/fast somehow)
Show your research to back up your claims. Define point blank range. Why would they be be turning their body whilst coming toward you or moving away? Shields can be damaged and become unusable, or even be wrestled from you in combat. They can only point in one direction at a time, which may not be the direction the arrow comes from. Care to change your mind?
@bandiroto I'm referring to the fact that there is zero archeological evidence to support the idea that the linothorax was made of linen.
Incorrect. And short of one or two fragments, we have no real evidence of them using leather either. Those fragments could be from ceremonial armour, such as that found in Tutankhamun's tomb.
The most important is the angle of the shot...Usually on a battlefield archers shot volleys of arrows from a long distance. And they aimed high so the arrow gained height and then with its weight and speed it fell on the enemy. So i think its kinetic energy and m/sec wasnt that deadly or powerful as a straight shot or from a high tower/wall shooting downwards...
in other words only at a clear sight and a straight zero angle the arrows could penetrate an armor and that was a rare scenario...
Otherwise Alexanders phalanxes would have huge casualties because every single one of those hundreds of thousands Persian soldiers they fought against, carried a bow
From what I understand arrow volleys were closer since arrows actually lose velocity if shot at long distance, as well as range. Also since Alexanders phalanxes rely on heavy shields the armor seems more likely to have been a secondary measure rather than the primary protection
@@bmxdoe I'll have to go look into my research at some point, but I recall more than one source stating that the velocity of arrows fired by English longbows retained as much as 90% of their velocity on impact, despite the huge distance and massive arc. This may not be a perfect carry over to ancient times, but it seemed like a nice starting point and the basis for me choosing a test velocity.
Angle of the shot would definitely have an effect here and not something I considered. Why? I was thinking worse case scenario and only had so many shots before I completely trashed my pride and joy :) I figured that the 'effective' thickness is higher for angled shots, so my straight on tests were what one would have to encounter if soldiers were engaged up close and personal. I figured that if they could survive up close and personal than they'd survive angled shots from a distance.
In the end though the armor did its job. They may have penetrated some, but none would have been a kill shot. If I had to go through this test myself, I can tell you what I would do - I'd just wear some type of fur or layering that separated the armor from my body by about 1/3 to 1/2 of an inch. After all, it wasn't as if something inside the armor stopped the arrows from going deeper, there was nothing more than a pillow inside - all of those arrows were stopped by the armor.
@@Hokie2k11 they are very heavy though.
Молодцы!
They did not have steel arrow heads.
conncork Iron
hardcore
this is meant to be glued together. when made correctly it was better than steel armor
That gave me a good laugh. Thanks a bunch! :)
Also, on a sidenote. Would it stop the ultimate super-weapon of the medieval world, The Katana? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this deep philosophical subject.
Man... The Katana is just another sword. It isnt better in anyway whatsoever. It doesnt cut more, it doesnt pierce more... It is just too much oversold. (That being said, The Katana is one of my favorite swords, but it isnt a superweapon.)
In fact, Samurai used more spears, polearms and bows more often than swords. The Swords was the last ditch weapon. A good spearman could just kill you faster and better than another swordsman...
But its the perfect weapon if you want a quick draw and stuff like that.
Melanrick 'kill you faster and better'
huh
@KunTao Lai Lai In the "peaceful" edo period the katana/wakizashi were like a badge saying " i work for the shogun dont mess with me ! if you do i will cut you in half to forgive you" .
Must be something missing here if your reproduction is accurate the why would have the armor been worn at all anybody ?
Try using leather. For many reasons, linen is just not practical as armor due to the logistics behind getting enough of it to make armor. Tanned leather is far far more common, far easier to make, and makes much more sense than something so very expensive.
The practicality depends on use, however. One of the reasons I'm researching the linothorax and south Indian Peti armor is because I live in an area of Texas that' has an Mediterranean climate- even walking around, much less marching and fighting, heat exhaustion is a real problem. Since he was often on the march during the hot season, this was a huge issue. Leather armor is HOT.
Bippy Grace Linen was historically in very short supply, and was quite expensive. To get any sort of protection, you need a lot of layers of it.
Beyond that, the evidence for linen armor just isn't there.
demomanchaos My understanding is that there's written accounts of it, as well as the linen and silk armor traditions of India (thousand nail coats, Peti armor) and the far east, with which there was some cultural exchange by the time of Alexander. As well as the later viking cloth +fur armor for those that couldn't afford maile (where cloth was expensive enough it was used as a huge mark of trade, almost a currency), and later European cloth armor traditions. Also, having fleshed a hide and having woven linen, linen is easier to work with. Hand woven fabric was also expensive, and tanning and rhetting linen both stink to high heaven. I'm probably going to try to make both forms- leather armor and linen- and just see how they perform in the heat out here.
Bippy Grace Those armors are quite different to the ancient Greek style though. Those are actually gambesons, padded armor. made from wool or cotton generally. They are hotter and work on very different principles to hardened leather.
From what I understand, the only literary reference to linen armor is something along the lines of"linen corseted argives" which is quite vague. Facing something in linen is one thing, making hard armor entirely out of linen is another.
demomanchaos
Unfortunatley there is very little evidence of Leather armour that is'nt within the realms of Knightly tournaments or Fetish bondage outfits. Hoplites were also the rich members of society so wouldnt have settled for a shittier armour just because It may have been more expensive they would want to be able to show off and Brazenly shout to the Enemy "look at me I dont give a shit about expense and I want to kill you" Im in favour of the "sandwich" Idea where there is a chunk of layered Linen, then a layer of Leather (for stability and holding a shape, then a further chunk of layered Linen for extra protection, comfort and breath ability. However this is just my opinion.
Good thing the linothorax didn't actually exist.
A good armor, there is controversy over whether they were made of linen or leather