https://gizmodo.com/dendra-armor-test-experimental-archaeology-1851492724>Dendra Panoply was functional and very good armor.Dendra bros, we are so back!
>>61974230>guy has to squat awkwardly with vision obstructed by the massive neck guardClearly non functional
>>61974403You have your buddies cover you while you swing like a madman at anything in front, duh
>>61974269Linothorax for me.
>>61974403what do you think fighting behind a shield like a scutum is like? You hold it up to just below your eyes.
>>61974230>19,000 AD>still using a panoplykino
>>61974658Thats so fucking gay looking>>61974269Why is everything centurichan draws sameface and devoid of personality
>copper 5% zincthat doesnt seem right. such an alloy would suck for armor plus that would be brass and not bronzemore likely its tin bronze with maybe some arsenic in there aswelldoes the tusk helmet have a boiled leather or linothorax-like backing? or even the bronze plates?
>>61974753Every copper alloy was called bronze.
>>61974403>>61974579>>61974599that guy had two supporters from each side holding heavy ivy+leather shields. unironically those armors were used mostly in hunting heavy and big predators like bears and cats. warfare was the last thing they were thinking about when creating it..
>>61974599Except that the shield is movable and only comes up to block, the neck guard is fixed and not ergonomic.dendralarpers keep losing
>>61974759is there any direct source though, where they analyzed it with xray spectroscopy or something?low-zinc tombac stuff like that would make awful armor
>>61974811>>61974823the armor is interesting when you get smashing right with bears or lion paws.
>>61974823Virtually every armor find like it has been analysed for composition. Early armourers did not have much say in what alloy they ended up with.
>>61974927k/ike sliding thing?
>>61974823what also makes me doubt it is that copper alloys predating proper tin bronze were usually arsenical bronze, and brass should actually be harder to make if tin ore is availableand that its a two component recipe (traces of arsenic go a long way), and 5% seems awfully round. sets off my guesswork detectors
>>61974953dude shut the fuck up schizo, i dont even know what we are supposed to be sliding
>>61974965>5% seems awfully round. sets off my guesswork detectorsDid you not read the part about it being the closest modern alloy to match?
>>61974965>>61974971are you crying already?
>>61974975welp. if anyone has spectroscopy results, id like to see them
>>61974753Following the links through to the actual paper, the exact quote is "For the purposes of this study, we used a replica of the Dendra armour (S9 Fig in S1 File) made in Birmingham, UK. [10], in 1984 by staff and students of the Metal-working Department at the Bournville College of Art in Birmingham under the direction of Diana Wardle (Online Supplement: Section 4.5). The replica was made using gilding metal (95% copper, 5% zinc), which was the closest alloy to the original bronze available."So it isn't really saying that the original was 5% zinc, but probably rather that the workshop didn't have anything better available at the time.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301494
>>61975057hey i found somethinghttps://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/greek-bronze-age-armour-study-1.7217371its 10% tin. that seems rounded but much better. if they didnt test its durability or protectiveness it doesnt really matter but its still misleading and defenitely not "the closest they could get"the reader will just get the impression that the armor was less protective than it actually wasi really dont get why they didnt just use tin bronze though, that shit isnt hard to come by
>>61975291>>61975246i guess by "available" they mean whatever happens to be lying on your workbench at the time
>>61975310Probably a combination of the original metal plus whatever the scientists calculated the strength, malleability, flexibility, etc. of that metal was. Just find the closest match.
>>61975324i think "whatever is on your workbench" is actually a much closer approximation of what they did
>>61975246>>61975291https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jahrb-rgzm/article/download/15311/9187This paper has the chemical composition of various components of the armour and it's copper plus 9-12% tin. I don't thinkbrass was even a thing in the bronze age
>>61975374That does seem to be the case. I strongly doubt the analysis behind it went beyond "well, it's mostly copper".>>61975642>I don't think>brass was even a thing in the bronze ageApparently intentional brass goes back to at least Roman times: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass#History
>>61974778Iv seen similar concepts done in multiple cultures at different points in history, even the south american peoples that fought the conquistadors employed a type.of armour that covered high like that, even coupled with a helm that came down to almost the brim, leaving a thin narrow slit like a visor.
>>61974230Okay but these are like rear rank triarii units. No way the whole army fielded those back then.
>>61974230Oh hey, they were studying this very recently, from the wiki>Most recently, in 2024, researchers from the University of Thessaly, led by professor Andreas Flouris, using Wardle's 1980s replica, added new conclusions on the ergonomics and kinematics of the warrior wearing the armor, showing that "[a] group of special armed-forces personnel wearing a replica of the Dendra armour were able to complete an 11-hour simulated Late Bronze Age combat protocol that we developed from a series of studies based on the available evidence".[1]This research indicates that the armour was perfectly suited to use in battle, not simply ceremonial as originally assumed
