Are there stats for a crocodile tooth sword?

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Rasna

Haven't said that this specific example was armour donned in battle - citing myself, "likely for parade use only". In Osprey books is quite the norm to see erroneous reconstruction af armour and equipment, especially in older ones - a lot of drawings of Angus McBride would be considered wrong reconstructions today, but he only did what the authors told him to do. In this specific case, I think that the author of the volume knew that the Roman crocodile armour was ceremonial but he tried to present a hypothetical practical version of it.

If you thought that it wasn't used in battle then why show an illustration of it being used in battle? There was no such thing as parade armour until the Renaissance. It was a religious garment.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Rasna

Tut's scale leather armour was made from goat leather with a six-layered linen backing, but as good it is, it's only a single example from Late Bronze Age.

It wasn't made of goat leather. The scales are way too thick for goat leather. If any goat leather was used, it would only have been the innermost layer of the liner (the backing was made of six layers of linen and one of fine leather). The best analysis was done by Thomas Hulit: T. D. Hulit, Late Bronze Age Scale Armour in the Near East. Ph.D., Durham University (2002).

For some reason, Ancient Egyptians didn't seem to have used crocodile leather or hippo leather armour, at least not in relevant numbers. Maybe they used a very little of both, but it doesn't show on written or archaeological record, and the fact that leather is degradable doesn't help us.

We may not know what animals were used but we know that they used plenty of hide armour. At the battle of Megiddo, Egyptian records said that they captured two hundred hide corselets and two bronze ones. That is a ratio of a hundred hide armours for every metal one.

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

If you thought that it wasn't used in battle then why show an illustration of it being used in battle? There was no such thing as parade armour until the Renaissance. It was a religious garment.

It was a religious garment that incidentally - because it wasn't its main function - would give also some protection to the wearer. Ergo, a potential armour used as religious garment. That's why I said "likely for parade use only". The Osprey reconstruction is purely hypothetical and it isn't a recostruction of that specific religious garment used in battle, but of a battle version of a crocodile skin used as armour.

The leather scales of Tut's armour, having a thickness of 1.8-2.5 mm, are actually compatible with the maximum possible thickness of goat leather, which is for most around 1 mm in thickness but the thickest samples can reach 2-2.5 mm. Goat leather is generally tougher than cow leather of the same thickness, so I think it wouldn't be a second-choice material for leather armour.

As far I know, Egyptian texts don't mention specifically crocodile leather or hippo leather armour, and the leather corselets taken at Megiddo are from the defeated side - not the Egyptians, thus it was extremely unlikely that there were even a single corselet made of crocodile rawhide among the booty. As I said before, maybe there were some crocodile leather armour or hippo leather armour in Ancient Egypt, but the archaeological data is completely absent (because you know, leather usually don't last that long) and the known written sources are silent about them. If Ancient Egyptians had used crocodile armour or hippo armour at a certain point of their history, only a thiny fraction of the warrior elite would have been wearing them, little but sure. They would have been even more expensive than the other more common forms of leather armour, so essentially they would have been armour for the "elites of the elites".

Other cultures in Central Africa did use crocodile skin armour, so it isn't a bad armour material. The only drawback is that it wouldn't be practical equipping an entire army with crocodile leather cuirasses. It would be too expensive and not cost-effective. Apparently, crocodile leather was an armour for the elites in settings where better armours weren't available.

[The Colonel]

Is there potential that wearing crocodile or hippopotamus leather armour migth have been of some special significance? As, for example, the Aztec Jaguar or Eagle warriors?

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Is there potential that wearing crocodile or hippopotamus leather armour migth have been of some special significance? As, for example, the Aztec Jaguar or Eagle warriors?

Yes, it would be entirely possible. Both the animals were considered kind of sacred in Ancient Egypt.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Rasna

It was a religious garment that [I]
The leather scales of Tut's armour, having a thickness of 1.8-2.5 mm, are actually compatible with the maximum possible thickness of goat leather, which is for most around 1 mm in thickness but the thickest samples can reach 2-2.5 mm. Goat leather is generally tougher than cow leather of the same thickness, so I think it wouldn't be a second-choice material for leather armour.

These baseless assumptions aren't helpful. Where is the evidence that it is goat leather? Produce one text or analysis that tells us that goat leather was used to make scale armour.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Rasna

Yes, it would be entirely possible. Both the animals were considered kind of sacred in Ancient Egypt.

Yes it is possible but there is nothing to suggest that they ever did it. Baseless assumptions aren't helpful.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Rasna

Yes, it would be entirely possible. Both the animals were considered kind of sacred in Ancient Egypt.

They're also ridiculously dangerous to hunt for people in little reed boats with bronze-tipped spears. The carcases of hippos and the biggest crocodiles are difficult just to haul out of the water. Then it's a multi-man multi-day project to harvest the meat and leather.

This sort of hide armor might be highly desirable compared to alternatives but it'll come at premium prices.

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

These baseless assumptions aren't helpful. Where is the evidence that it is goat leather? Produce one text or analysis that tells us that goat leather was used to make scale armour.

Well, about Tut's armour:

(Hulit 2002:88-89)

"Initial examination of the armour scales in November, 1998 suggested that the scales were made of alum tawed leather (see Appendix 2), a process whereby the hide is cured with a solution of alum and common salt (see Waterer 1956: 150, 154-155). All of the scales are of a pale to mid-yellow colour on the suede side while most are painted or lacquered on the epidermal side (the outward face of the scale). A re-examination of the armour in February, 2000 indicated that the scales are almost certainly made of rawhide. In the cases where the paint had flaked away from the face of the scale, it was possible to check to see if they were translucent. This was done by holding a scale up to the light of one of the portable photography lights, thereby establishing that the scales are indeed translucent. To the best of the author's knowledge, the only hide product that is translucent is rawhide, as every other tanning or tawing process renders the hide opaque (see Appendix 2). As no samples of the armour were obtained for analysis, it is not possible to conclusively prove that the armour scales are made of rawhide, nor is it possible to be certain of the type of animal from which the hide came. The thickness of the rawhide, varying from approximately 1.3 to 2.5 mm, might suggest sheep or goat hide rather than a larger animal (e.g. cattle) (Barry Birkin, J. Clayton & Sons Tanneries, Ltd., pers. comm.). The laces have a different, more fine-grained appearance and are not translucent, suggesting that they have been subject to a different tanning process. There is no evidence, either in Carter's (1933) text and excavation notes or in the author's examination, to suggest that any metal was used in the construction of the armour."

Ergo, it might be goat hide, as I did remember. However, I was wrong in saying that it was certainly goat hide while it could be other things as well. IMO the thickest sections of a goat skin would be a good candidate, because they're tougher than cowhide and they're resistant to both puncturing and abrasion.

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

They're also ridiculously dangerous to hunt for people in little reed boats with bronze-tipped spears. The carcases of hippos and the biggest crocodiles are difficult just to haul out of the water. Then it's a multi-man multi-day project to harvest the meat and leather.

This sort of hide armor might be highly desirable compared to alternatives but it'll come at premium prices.

Indeed. That's what I thought about when I mentioned their lack of cost-effectiveness.