African cuirass?

[fernando]

Dear Jim, from your previous thread i give account that the one fresh approach is the Ned Kelly saga. May i suggest that his gang shielding apparatuses have by no means any linkage to the implement under discussion; not in form, nor in resistence, neither in means. We can't establish the minimum comparison bewteen a 1/4" thick (tempered) plough comonents and a thin bent sheet of soft iron, circa four times thinner.
I would end by saying that, while Ned's and his pack adventure has proven pathetic, Panoleon's item still has an unproven explanation .

Yours humbly

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by fernando

Panoleon's item still has an unproven explanation .

Can we agree on the following points:

1/ Crocodile armours exist
2/ Crocodile armours exist all over the world and they are not specific to Africa
3/ Crocodile armour or cuirasses are made of animal skin and not reinforced with iron breast plates
4/ The construction techniques of Panoleon's item look European
5/ Panoleon's item is from the 20th c.

[fernando]

In context, what misses an explanation is why, by whom and what this thing was made for.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by fernando

In context, what misses an explanation is why, by whom and what this thing was made for.

Correct, but these information's are subjective.

On one side, we have the objective information's, physical descriptions and facts.

On the other side, we can try to guess by whom and why, but to do this, we need elements of comparison in books and museums...

Without these data, any explanation will be a lovely story, but no more.

[fernando]

I gather that explanations are not subjective, but objective . Maybe no conclusion will ever come out, who knows. Until then, this has been fun; constructive+cultural discussions have been taking place, which is great .

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Dear Jim, from your previous thread i give account that the one fresh approach is the Ned Kelly saga. May i suggest that his gang shielding apparatuses have by no means any linkage to the implement under discussion; not in form, nor in resistence, neither in means. We can't establish the minimum comparison bewteen a 1/4" thick (tempered) plough comonents and a thin bent sheet of soft iron, circa four times thinner.
I would end by saying that, while Ned's and his pack adventure has proven pathetic, Panoleon's item still has an unproven explanation .

Yours humbly

Of course it remains unexplained, and as you have apparently agreed with the point I was making by using this comparison (also regarded as an analogy, which means it is NOT directly related to the item or subject being examined).
My intent was to actually dismantle my own previous suggestion that perhaps this liner of iron was for bullet proofing, by showing that iron plate adequate for protection was probably much heavier (as this comparison illustrates).

So as you note this 'comparison' does not serve as an explanation, but is objectively disqualifying toward a subjective suggestion I had previously made, thus eliminated from the ongoing discussion. I very much agree, this discussion as been fun, and very informative....I know Im learning a lot.
As Kubur has well noted, comparisons are essential, and Colin's suggestion of Pitt Rivers is well placed.

[fernando]

Well Jim, i wouldn't be surprised if Napoleon's item turns out to be one of a kind, thus incomparable. OTOH, i would certainly subscribe Colin's suggestion. It sure is a good test; Panoleon willing to do it .

[fernando]

Panoleon, may i appologize for diverting but Jim, you are a Texas wanderer. Have you ever been in Waco, in a visit to the Texas Rangers museum ?
You sure remember the American (Ned Kelly) bullet proof 'home version' . Also a failure ... also a dramatic one .


.

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks Fernando,
Yup, Ive been there OK, and had forgotten this anomaly.
In further thinking, one of the tangible theories which has been mentioned here, but gained no further traction, is Colin's suggestion that perhaps this was an old armor put onto an iron display setup.

Without further evidence of such apparatus (a good descriptive word Fernando)being actually worn, this seems a viable theory which is tenable as a reasonable explanation.

In museums I have seen excavated swords and relics which were displayed mounted on clear plastic casing to fill in for the missing elements.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... In further thinking, one of the tangible theories which has been mentioned here, but gained no further traction, is Colin's suggestion that perhaps this was an old armor put onto an iron display setup...

Making me remember #10:

Originally Posted by fernando

... Or could it be that someone else, in the greatest of fantasies, had the iron part made in order to prop up the historic hide and keep the cuirass upright and 'alive' ?...

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Making me remember #10:

Well that was my fox paws!!! Sorry Fernando, my bad...........
As noted, it was a good suggestion.