An LS question

[antisocialmunky]

The helmet isn't all that particularly great. That thing is either ceremonial, art, or for some sort of chariot bourne infantry.

[Ibrahim]

The helmet isn't all that particularly great. That thing is either ceremonial, art, or for some sort of chariot bourne infantry.

actually, IIRC, it was tested against bronze age weaponry, and it was surprisingly good (the history channel had one such experiment-though granted I don't trust them too much)

[Novellus]

The helmet isn't all that particularly great. That thing is either ceremonial, art, or for some sort of chariot bourne infantry.

Remember that when the helmet of bone is struck, it will shatter to pieces and break, rather than transfer the concussive force such as with solid metal helmets. The durability is shorter, but the energy from the blow will not have as powerful of an impact as would metal. Objects that shatter are good for dispersing energy. That is why some bullet-proof vests have a ceramic-base plate built in that breaks and shatters in the form of cracks, which allows the energy to disperse, rather than wear a completely solid and unbreaking plate that would transfer energy directly to the wearer, which causes more damage from the sheer force.

[Smeel]

And people who are stupid enough to enable someone to hit their head more than twice, full bronze helmet or not, shouldn't be too long lived on the battlefield anyway.

[oudysseos]

I don't know whether the Dendra Suit was useful or not, but I mentioned it because the OP asked if the mis-named Lorica Segmentata was the only amour made of large pieces, which it isn't. I don't think that there's any kind of explicit developmental link between them.

[Elmetiacos]

It's not too different from the Coat of Plates - an experiment from 13th Century Northern Europe.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Well, I always though lorica segmentata was the most refined and sophisticated mass-produced and relatively durable (yes, I know one of its major issues was coming apart) example of its kind. And that is not Roman fanboy-ism speaking in me. The Medieval armour Elmetiacos showed was attached to a base, and the Mycenaean charioteer armour was rather bulky and simplified.

Oh, and yes, those two are more like laminated armour, as oudysseos wisely noted.

[antisocialmunky]

It's not too different from the Coat of Plates - an experiment from 13th Century Northern Europe.

That's what I said. Nice picture.

[Ludens]

Actually, it is almost certain that such panoplies were borne by charioteers. What evidence do you have that Mycenaean chariots were "wobbly"? The Chinese employed a similarly heavy panoply on their charioteers for several centuries.

Other smaller parts of this type of panoply have been found over the years, but a complete panoply like the famous Dendra example has never been found elsewhere.

I am pretty sure I read that it was unique and its function unclear, but I don't have the source with me. I'll get back to it in a couple of days. Mycenaean chariots are presumably no more wobbly than any solid-tire vehicle made for traversing unflattened ground. Still, keeping your balance on them would take some effort.

[antisocialmunky]

The suit is unique and surprisingly intact for being in the ground since before the Greek Dark age.

However, it seems to have been well known enough to allegedly have ideograms of it from two sites:

Knossos


Pylos


So it was known during the period it was supposedly used but no one has any ideas of what its exact purpose was. So its kinda a LS type situation where it existed and there are representations and permutations of it but its still kinda a unicorn.

http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/armour1.htm

[MeinPanzer]

The suit is unique and surprisingly intact for being in the ground since before the Greek Dark age.

However, it seems to have been well known enough to allegedly have ideograms of it from two sites:

Knossos


Pylos


So it was known during the period it was supposedly used but no one has any ideas of what its exact purpose was. So its kinda a LS type situation where it existed and there are representations and permutations of it but its still kinda a unicorn.

http://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/armour1.htm

Yes, as shown in the Linear B ideograms, such heavy panoplies were not uncommon, it is just that, as one so often finds elsewhere with armour, very little has survived. We are incredibly lucky to have a complete example of such a panoply.

I am pretty sure I read that it was unique and its function unclear, but I don't have the source with me. I'll get back to it in a couple of days. Mycenaean chariots are presumably no more wobbly than any solid-tire vehicle made for traversing unflattened ground. Still, keeping your balance on them would take some effort.

Sure, it would take some effort, just like fighting on horseback without stirrups and with only a basic saddle in a heavy panoply. That doesn't mean it wasn't done, or wasn't commonplace.

Any source stating that the nature or the purpose of this armour is unclear is not very informative. It's obvious from examining other parallels that such armour would be worn by a charioteer, who had the benefit of not having to run around on the battlefield; who would be rich enough to afford it; and who, not holding a shield, would need the benefit of a heavy panoply for maximum protection. Besides, I am curious to hear what these sources state could be other uses for such armour; heavy infantrymen? Or do they take the usual cop-out and declare it "ritual armour"?

[antisocialmunky]

I've always been partial to the built it->test it->refine technique->repeat method of testing. As much as people complain about lack of creativity there sure is a lot of it. Perhaps people need to be more creative in looking for their own uncreativity and mental hangups.

[Ludens]

Sure, it would take some effort, just like fighting on horseback without stirrups and with only a basic saddle in a heavy panoply. That doesn't mean it wasn't done, or wasn't commonplace.

Any source stating that the nature or the purpose of this armour is unclear is not very informative. It's obvious from examining other parallels that such armour would be worn by a charioteer, who had the benefit of not having to run around on the battlefield; who would be rich enough to afford it; and who, not holding a shield, would need the benefit of a heavy panoply for maximum protection. Besides, I am curious to hear what these sources state could be other uses for such armour; heavy infantrymen? Or do they take the usual cop-out and declare it "ritual armour"?

"Chariots" by Arthur Cotterell states the following (chapter 4, pages 112-113):

Because the Dendra equipment is far too heavy and unwieldy for a foot soldier, some scholars believe its wearer would have stood in a chariot. But again the weight and cumbersomeness of the armour could not but have been a serious liability in a fast-moving chariot. Unlike the armoured medieval knight, the Dendra warrior was not seated on a high saddle with his legs gripping the sides of a horse, and his feet placed safely in stirrups: instead, if an archer never accompanied the charioteer, he was trying to maintain his balance while thrusting sideways with a two-handed spear.
   The argument for the Dendra armour belonging to a chariot warrior is unconvincing. Apart from the weight problem, there are records of lighter corselets more suited to this purpose, similar to the protection Menelaus was lucky enough to be wearing at Troy. Most telling of all, however, is the narrative of the Iliad, for Pandarus [an Eastern bowman in Trojan service who became convinced of the uselessness of his bow, and joined Aeneas on his chariot] did not fight from Aeneas' chariot as a thrusting spearman. On the contrary, he threw a javelin at Diomedes, a weapon used in addition to the bow by the Egyptians in their chariots. Pandarus' sudden death after the failure of this throw may well have seemed just to Homes, since the javelin as well as the arrow harmed heroes at an unfair distance, especially when launched from a speeding chariot.

There is no further discussion of the Dendra armour's use. I thought I also saw a mention of it in Hans van Wees' "Greek Warfare: Myths and Realities", but I cannot find it in the index, and the book does not deal with warfare from before Homer's time.