Dan said that "a winter coat will stop cutting attacks" (emphasis mine). Since I have been repeatedly challenged whether I agree with this statement, I will say that it is incorrect. A winter coat can stop cuts, as proven by the news articles I provided. There are various styles, types, and thicknesses of winter coats. There are various styles of edged weapons with various degrees of sharpening. There are various cutting attacks, including some of which are not well delivered. We know that cloth armors were trusted, and many of them were constructed of a few layers of fabric with loose fill, which is exactly how some winter coats are made.

On the other hand, calling the statement ridiculous is also extreme.

Consider it another way:
"A hammer will drive a nail."
versus
"A hammer can drive a nail."

Most people will not consider the first statement ridiculous, as they know how to hammer nails into wood. But it is imprecise, as a light hammer may not be able to drive a nail, or a weak person may not be able to drive a nail, or you can't drive a nail into 12 mm steel plate with a 24 oz. hammer, or someone without skill can't even hit the nail...etc..

There is a fine line between having to add all the qualifiers and making a ridiculous statement. If Dan had said all winter coats will stop cutting attacks, or a winter coat will stop all cutting attacks, it would have been ridiculous, but his statement seems reasonable, if imprecise, based upon the presented evidence. If Dan had said a winter coat can stop a cutting attack, it shouldn't have even been an issue to derail this thread.

Thanks Mart and Sean. Yes I meant to say that a winter coat can stop a sword cut. The gist of my statement is that proper armour was designed to stop points, not edges. Up until the development of firearms, spears and arrows were the primary threat on a battlefield, not swords. Anything that can stop an arrow or spear will have no trouble at all stopping a sword cut.

The Benty Grange helmet is made of horn plates (over an iron frame) and even though there was iron used for most helmets, it was deemed good enough to offer effective protection and is basically the same as turtle shell.

Tod

I've seen measurements according to which horn is about as good for armour as the best rawhide (boiled, hard-surfaced rawhide).

A turtle's shell is bony. The horny plates (scutes) covering the outside are basically the same as horn.

I think too many people on this topic are thinking Medieval and not Stone Age, as the topic specifies. This armor is not going to face a metal sword, or if it does, the smith work and metal quality will be poor. Surely, shell armor would crack, but so would the attacker's edged or pointed weapon. Just as repairing butted mail after being stuck was part of post-battle routine, why wouldn't shell armor repair also fit this routine?

Weight would be the biggest issue, so the crab shells are more appealing to me. Although as a fantasy world, the shells could be more porous and lighter. Any chemists out there who would come up with a lighter material than calcium to make shells?

If this is a tropical world, I'm guessing heavy clothing wouldn't be very practical. Have there ever been successful rope armors in tropical areas? It sounds uncomfortable, but it would be a material similar to coconut husks.

book sounds great can i see it when youre done (send us a link or title or smt)

id say using a shield from one of the dog sized shells (layered 2-3) and making armor our of diffeent sized ones like large ones goin down the center of the body or as the solid bit of the breasplate and have smaller ones to make a kinda chainmail on the bendy bits on the humanoids body

Japanese kikko armor is very similar in size and shape to tortise shell segments. Armor could be made with individual tortise shell segments laced together much like kikko armor.

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

Sir Abbot, I don't think this is useful to the debate, The term, more dangerous is broad one and Danis applying something narrower. Something can be dangerous reasons other the effiecency it can transfer force and pressure. Force insitantce the ease of defnding the attacker and attacking at the same time, ease of getting around defenses, ability to do disarments, actions which easier handle multiple opponents. What Dan is simply the ease certain thrust or cutts compromise certain protective matriels, which a less broad statement that what is more a more dangerous form of attack.