4 ms·

Fascinating, the second image attached to https://twitter.com/FedeItaliano76/status/1435326827971612675?s=20 https://twitter.com/FedeItaliano76/status/143532682

Fascinating, the second image attached to https://twitter.com/FedeItaliano76/status/1435326827971612675?s=20 https://twitter.com/FedeItaliano76/status/143532682797161267... is good too -- I'm not settled in that confirming the second hypothesis (surface use), as the Twitter user says, it seems to me to also give stronger weight to the first (under water use). In this image the 'goatskin' users appear fully clothed in dresses (could they be scale armour or other weighted clothing), only one has a beard. A person without a goatskin appears "above" them (could be behind depending on perspective) and IMO appears to be getting shot with arrows. The "divers" aren't wearing onion-shaped helmets. The goatskins appear to be fixed to the belts on their waists. One could interpret this as showing underwater swimming to avoid archers. Perhaps it was an idea, rather than a practiced activity? Maybe the goatskin has rocks in it too, to balance buoyancy? Perhaps the carrying a rock bit was not shown for fear of letting enemies in on the idea!?! [But yes, more probably a floatation device; fun to speculate though. Would particularly be interested to look at perspective in Assyrian bas reliefs] Really interesting, would love to hear some Assyrian historians debate this.

woofie11 5y ago
I would too. Unfortunately, the last Assyrian historians died nearly 3000 years ago.
- fsckboy 5y ago
  There are still Assyrians today, they are a persecuted Christian minority in the lands currently disputed between Shia and Sunni factions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity
  - woofie11 5y ago
    That was a fascinating article. Thank you!
killjoywashere 5y ago
The work of submerging air at atmospheric pressure vastly exceeds the potential energy value extractable from the oxygen in terms of ATP. He's using it to float.
- seiferteric 5y ago
  That's what diving weights are for.
- caymanjim 5y ago
  I was thinking that as well; it's not going to get you more than a few breaths of air, and it's not going to be easy to submerge with one. Even bogged down with weapons and armor, I suspect it would be impossible to submerge while holding something that large filled with air.
  - mod 5y ago
    Even if you could submerge it, it would require ridiculous effort to hold it submerged. I doubt one could swim across a body of water with weapons, armor, and a submerged goatskin bag and expect to make it very often.
- trhway 5y ago
  >The work of submerging air at atmospheric pressure vastly exceeds the potential energy value extractable from the oxygen in terms of ATP. He's using it to float. he is wearing some armor, definitely head helmet - that allows to balance the floatation, and would be beyond most human capabilities without the goatskin. So he achieves 2 goals simultaneously - extra air for prolonged diving as well as diving while donning some armor. That goatskin is like 20-30 liters - good for several minutes of breathing and those 20-30kg of extra floatation allow for the typical armor/chainmail and weapons. There is no issues with holding it submerged like other commenters suggest as he keeps it under the body, so the main force of those 20-30kg pushes onto his body up, and if anything it is very easy to belt it to the body so it wouldn't need any hands involvement to be maintained under the body. There is also no issues with drawing breath as suggested by others as the goatskin is under the same water pressure as his lungs.
dakial1 5y ago
I think it is settled among historians that this is a flotation device. There are multiple descriptions about it around: (http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~vaucher/History/Prehistoric_Craft/Float.html http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~vaucher/History/Prehistoric_Cra...)
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  I wonder if the scene depicted is much of an action scene then, or if the archer is just there because they're soldiers. I'd imagine swimming with this goat bag is hardly tactically viable in almost any situation.
freeflight 5y ago
> One could interpret this as showing underwater swimming to avoid archers. Could also be the scene of a siege, the swimmers trying to traverse a river with heavy currents, indicated by the swirls in the water. In that scenario the archers would give them covering fire from the defending soldiers in the castle structure. This could also explain the archers wearing different helmets: They belong to different sides in the conflict.
- pbhjpbhj 5y ago
  I thought the archers were friendly at first. Then noticed one is pointing their bow down towards the swimmers. The swimmer without a goatskin looked to me to have an arrow (or two?) in them that would have come from that direction. Detail was hard for me to make out though. (I'm purposefully arguing only pro diving, in case that's not clear.)
  - freeflight 5y ago
    > I thought the archers were friendly at first. Then noticed one is pointing their bow down towards the swimmers. Yeah I noticed that detail too, might be a simple oversight on the artists part. Or the scene depicts the men fleeing, using the strong current of the river and flotation devices, while being attacked from both sides.
trutannus 5y ago
Given how it's nearly impossible to breathe under water without the air itself being pressurized, I highly doubt option one. If you ever tried breathing out of a tube underwater as a kid, you'll know exactly what I mean.
- Gustomaximus 5y ago
  I've done this with a tube as a kid and get what your saying. But would a goat skin underwater be the same? The tube example is because of the pressure difference. Having a bladder underwater the air would easily come out to breath. IMO the harder thing would be getting the bladder to stay underwater, especially at the picture size, that would have a heap of buoyancy to offset.
- mcswell 5y ago
  The air in the bladder will be at exactly the same pressure as the water around it. Therefore if the diver were underwater with the bladder (a thing which I doubt, for reasons others have mentioned here), the air in the bladder would be at about the same pressure as the diver's lungs (about 0.2 psi higher, if the diver somehow managed to keep the bladder below him, as in the picture).
sigy 5y ago
The divers can not inflate it further once submerged, yet have put their mouths on the container. Even as a "re-breathing" container, having that reserve of air volume would allow for extended lingering time below the surface, as it would take much longer for the CO2 saturation to become a problem than just a lung full of air. Thus, this likely served two purposes. 1) buoyancy to counter the weight of armor, and 2) additional time underwater by rebreathing (more) stale air than one can hold in their lungs. Think about it, what would you do?

woofie11 5y ago

I would too. Unfortunately, the last Assyrian historians died nearly 3000 years ago.

fsckboy 5y ago
There are still Assyrians today, they are a persecuted Christian minority in the lands currently disputed between Shia and Sunni factions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity
- woofie11 5y ago
  That was a fascinating article. Thank you!

killjoywashere 5y ago

The work of submerging air at atmospheric pressure vastly exceeds the potential energy value extractable from the oxygen in terms of ATP. He's using it to float.

seiferteric 5y ago
That's what diving weights are for.
caymanjim 5y ago
I was thinking that as well; it's not going to get you more than a few breaths of air, and it's not going to be easy to submerge with one. Even bogged down with weapons and armor, I suspect it would be impossible to submerge while holding something that large filled with air.
- mod 5y ago
  Even if you could submerge it, it would require ridiculous effort to hold it submerged. I doubt one could swim across a body of water with weapons, armor, and a submerged goatskin bag and expect to make it very often.
trhway 5y ago
>The work of submerging air at atmospheric pressure vastly exceeds the potential energy value extractable from the oxygen in terms of ATP. He's using it to float. he is wearing some armor, definitely head helmet - that allows to balance the floatation, and would be beyond most human capabilities without the goatskin. So he achieves 2 goals simultaneously - extra air for prolonged diving as well as diving while donning some armor. That goatskin is like 20-30 liters - good for several minutes of breathing and those 20-30kg of extra floatation allow for the typical armor/chainmail and weapons. There is no issues with holding it submerged like other commenters suggest as he keeps it under the body, so the main force of those 20-30kg pushes onto his body up, and if anything it is very easy to belt it to the body so it wouldn't need any hands involvement to be maintained under the body. There is also no issues with drawing breath as suggested by others as the goatskin is under the same water pressure as his lungs.

dakial1 5y ago

I think it is settled among historians that this is a flotation device. There are multiple descriptions about it around: (http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~vaucher/History/Prehistoric_Craft/Float.html http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~vaucher/History/Prehistoric_Cra...)

spywaregorilla 5y ago
I wonder if the scene depicted is much of an action scene then, or if the archer is just there because they're soldiers. I'd imagine swimming with this goat bag is hardly tactically viable in almost any situation.

freeflight 5y ago

> One could interpret this as showing underwater swimming to avoid archers. Could also be the scene of a siege, the swimmers trying to traverse a river with heavy currents, indicated by the swirls in the water. In that scenario the archers would give them covering fire from the defending soldiers in the castle structure. This could also explain the archers wearing different helmets: They belong to different sides in the conflict.

pbhjpbhj 5y ago
I thought the archers were friendly at first. Then noticed one is pointing their bow down towards the swimmers. The swimmer without a goatskin looked to me to have an arrow (or two?) in them that would have come from that direction. Detail was hard for me to make out though. (I'm purposefully arguing only pro diving, in case that's not clear.)
- freeflight 5y ago
  > I thought the archers were friendly at first. Then noticed one is pointing their bow down towards the swimmers. Yeah I noticed that detail too, might be a simple oversight on the artists part. Or the scene depicts the men fleeing, using the strong current of the river and flotation devices, while being attacked from both sides.

trutannus 5y ago

Given how it's nearly impossible to breathe under water without the air itself being pressurized, I highly doubt option one. If you ever tried breathing out of a tube underwater as a kid, you'll know exactly what I mean.

Gustomaximus 5y ago
I've done this with a tube as a kid and get what your saying. But would a goat skin underwater be the same? The tube example is because of the pressure difference. Having a bladder underwater the air would easily come out to breath. IMO the harder thing would be getting the bladder to stay underwater, especially at the picture size, that would have a heap of buoyancy to offset.
mcswell 5y ago
The air in the bladder will be at exactly the same pressure as the water around it. Therefore if the diver were underwater with the bladder (a thing which I doubt, for reasons others have mentioned here), the air in the bladder would be at about the same pressure as the diver's lungs (about 0.2 psi higher, if the diver somehow managed to keep the bladder below him, as in the picture).

sigy 5y ago

The divers can not inflate it further once submerged, yet have put their mouths on the container. Even as a "re-breathing" container, having that reserve of air volume would allow for extended lingering time below the surface, as it would take much longer for the CO2 saturation to become a problem than just a lung full of air. Thus, this likely served two purposes. 1) buoyancy to counter the weight of armor, and 2) additional time underwater by rebreathing (more) stale air than one can hold in their lungs. Think about it, what would you do?