The thing with scale armour is that it seems to have primarily been used in places where archery was the dominant form of warfare, either mounted or on foot, which makes sense, I suppose, because the weakness scale armour has against upwards blows is irrelevant against arrows, which of course always strike in a downwards fashion. Also, with the German scale armour you mentioned, wouldn't that be just to show off? I mean, period helmets do show that German men-at-arms had a bit of a habit, more so than other Europeans, to add features to their armour that were completely useless or even counterproductive when fighting, but were solely there to instill fear into the enemy. I would imagine that with scale armour looking quite like the skin of dragons or other mythological creatures, that could have played a part.
As for german scale, Codex Manesse does show a soldier during a siege wearing a scale version of coat-of-plates on top of mail, so it was definitely not just for show - the picture in question (229v Der During) shows a hail of stones coming at them, and one already dead guy. commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Codex_Manesse_Der_D%C3%BCring.jpg
MartinGreywolf I agree with you Martin. Another very interesting example of plates on mail, from Russia. jamesdjulia.com/item/2447-358/ Try to angle blade against this armor :-) www.bestarmour.com/armour/armour_19b.jpg
About roman scale armor, it's worth mentioning that the type with scale over mail shirt was called Lorica Plumata while scale armor was called Lorica Squamata.
I call bull. People who research this should be more unified. When you google 'lorica squamata' - all kinds of stuff pops up. Is there are historical proof that lorica squamata exists? All i see in archeological finds is either lorica plumata or lamellar thats shaped like scales.
@@shrekas2966 it's not bull in the slightest. Timothy Dawson wrote extensively on the many types and how they were connected. I'm not a fan by any means of Dawson but that's one thing he got right. Just because you can't find the answer on the first page of Google doesn't debunk anything lol
Medieval Russia had use of scale armor too. They had a riveted version which was more labor intensive but also didn't let things bip through the armor when coming from below.
I once made a set of scale armor for my brief time when I was involved in the Society for Creative Anachronisms here in the US. A supply of bronze-colored aluminum sheet metal came into my possession so I cut it up into small rectangles, drilled holes in one leading edge, and sewed it onto a quilted gambeson, Bob's your uncle, I had cheap armor. (Am I using the "Bob's your uncle" phrase correctly? Dunno!) Looked great, and protected well enough against thick rattan swords. But it was loud! Every time I moved, the bouncing metal lozenges produced a horrific din! I walked about the events in a cloud of ratcheting noise and dirty looks, as conversations would have to be suspended until I moved out of earshot. I eventually abandoned the armor. Not because it was less than effective, but because I became so lonely due to the fact that no one would bother to try and talk over the noise.
Today scale armor is more expensive from armor vendors than brigandine or mail, so one rarely sees it offered for sale. This is the exact opposite of much of history, where scale was the bargain-price armor that wasn't so time-consuming to make as mail. All the armorer had to do was have an assistant sew the completed scales/disks to a backing garment of some sort. A lamellar corselet didn't even need that, just lace the strips together as directed. Naturally scale armor lacked mail's flexibility due to fit, and an upward thrust could do some real hurt, but a warrior of Late Roman or Early Medieval periods could use it as starter gear and feel good about it. The tendency of Rome to kit out the auxiliary units in scale armor instead of mail or segemented armor makes it clear that it was a budget item. I can accept Carolignian milites wearing scale armor due to Charlemagne's rapidly expanding field army, faced at the same time with his demands for armored horsemen instead of yokels arriving in their shirts. A horseman could show up with the muster with a scale coat instead of a mail coat and not get fined for incomplete kit. The absolute disappearance of anything that looks like scale armor for much of the Upper Middle Ages is basically for two reasons. First, the economy improved enough to make mail more widespread. Second the abundance of cloth and coat-of-plate armors for the lower-class soldiers undercut scale armor in cost of production, and provided about as much real protection.
@@emperorconstantine1.361 That was a fad from the "Sarmatian" period when Polish Nobles were trying to find heroic ancestors from the Roman times like the rest of Europe. The connection is rather dubious, but the noblemen had fun dressing up and having Sarmatian themed outings.
Polish scale armour karacena was something we call today "historical reenactment". It was parade armour inspired by ancient artworks and legends about Romans and Sarmatians.
Funny thing is a lot of people mistake lamellar armor as scale armor. Scale armor is armor where the surface looks literally like fish scale or dragon scale. In most cultures it was a decorative thing. As mail and lamellar does better job at defending the wearer from blows and arrows. In Korean culture, it was often worn by high ranking Military officers and generals they're not as protective as people think they are. I think Brigandines and full plate armor are really the pinnacle of all armour
Coming from the Dungeon and dragons background but having a interest in historical armor I have done a lil experiment Showing people pictures of historical lamellar armor ns asking them what kind of armor it is, and most in the roleplaying game comunity call it scale. maybe it would be interesting to do a video on the diference between scale and laminar armor as in the mind of many in the RPG comunity they are seen as the same thing.
This is what i was thinking as i was watching the video. From my experience playing rpg's most people refer to lamellar armor as scale, without know that there is a difference.
I believe the main difference is that the scales in scale armor must be attached to a backing, whereas laminar armor pieces are attached to each other.
9 лет назад
Greg5560 I had a player today that tought that lamellar armor was lorica segmentata...
Easiest thing to dintinguished them from each other is that the bottom part of each "scale" in scale armor was not rivetted/sewed, so you could easily just flip open from the bottom. While each pieces of lamellar armor are sewed in every side, and they ovelapped to the right side, which enemy can't easily angled their sword.
MariusThePaladin The discription of scale mail in DnD 5th edition is : This armor consists of a coat and leggings (and perhaps a separate skirt) of leather covered with overlapping pieces of metal, much like the scales of a fish. The suit includes gauntlets. And laminar armor is not in the armor list. So if your only arare of the armors on that list and shown a pictire of laminar armor the best siscriprion matching in in Dungeons and dragons would be scale mail.
Great video and good points lammelar has problems as well the lacing if cord rots and can be cut by a weapon or cut just by wear. Then it starts to fall apart the Japanese speak of this and the problem happening wile in battle. The Scandinavian culture encountered it in the middle east and said it was inferior to maille.
Do you only have to worry about cuts of the cord rots? Also, could the cord ever be made out of wire to eliminate this problem? What was it usually made of?
East Asian make the Best Lamellar.Often made from thousand tiny pieces,with complicated "sewing" pattern,the sewing were usually treated Leather,but Cord,and Rigid Fabric were also use.The pieces were made of different material(Leather/Bronze/Iron/Bone/Steel),decide on that material you could decide the strength of the pieces.plus the lacquer also boost it's durable Only poorly made lamellar armor would be such a trash.
I've heard that in China there were some battles where folded paper scale armour were successfully used against arrows and even stood against thrusts, according to what I've heard, of course. Has someone ever heard something about it?
I must admit, I'm rather skeptical towards the idea of thrusting "through" the armor just by angling one's attack upward. It doesn't seem like it would work that often, particularly not in an actual combat scenario, considering the small size of the scales compared to the generally much larger weapon. (You might pull it off with a small weapon like a knife with some regularity, but knives aren't generally useful in a battle as opposed to a coup-de-grace, or perhaps as used alongside another weapon in a duel.) It would seem to me that if there was such a crippling weakness in the design, that it would have been noted by ancient writers, no? At any rate, I've never heard of anything like that actually occurring. And if it did occur, I'd expect it to either be a Golden BB-like scenario or against poorly made or purely decorative scale armor. I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, but it just seems unlikely, and I'd like to see some more concrete proof of this supposed weakness, s'what I'm saying.
Maybe not thrusting, but if you were to slash at somebody wearing scale in an upwards motion it could have the same effect, albeit with less penetration.
Even if the sword is big compared to the gaps, that doesn't matter. The plates are stiched together with leather bands or something like that, which doesn't resist cutting. So thrusting (even only slightly!) upwards will easily go through. With thrusting upwards you don't have much reach so it still isn't a very bad armour... But yes, maybe they knew this weakness exactly and as matt said this type of armour was actually very rare.
Anyways, the japanese had scale armour, I think made of bamboo. It was made 'upside down' so that you would think it would be weak against blows from upward. But here bamboo is in fact better than metal! While a blow would be deflected from metal and simply glide between the plates and cut through the threads the tightly bound bamboo plates actually can catch the blade! This is of course very, very bad for the guy that now can't use his sword anymore and is very close to the enemy.
Plates in a scale armor may overlap in any of all 4 directions, so if You cover armor with some leather or even plain clothes Your opponent can't see what angle blow should go, from top to down or from down to top, or maybe left to right or right to left. Moreover, if you cover your armor with clothes, your opponent may not even know that you have scale breast plate, he doesn't know that he need to angle blade to pass armor.
jhjkhgjhfgjg jgjyfhdhbfjhg If they overlap in four dirrections, that's Lamellar. scale armour is when they are attached at the top to cloth underneath. Lamellar is when they are attached together in all four directions.
I really think the 'upward strike' vulnerability really isn't that big a problem. You'd really have to be grappling and really have to work that point in there.
Have you actually tried and tested that in combat MFenix? Upward stabs are actually difficult to accomplish unless you are in very close contact with a short blade. And even then I think you need a very high upward angle, otherwise the overlapping plate above will interfere with the blade. Of course I am just speculating myself, but I really feel this 'weakness' is not actually that easy a weakness to exploit.
I generally agree when it comes to purposeful upward strikes-even if they're possible and effective, forcing your opponent to use them exclusively already puts you at a huge advantage and limits the sorts of blows you need to watch out for. Something which might be a bigger problem is the point of the blade or spear skipping up the scales and working it's way in between them in a standard thrust. Obviously that's complete speculation, but it seems plausible, especially with a spear thrust.
How do you know when you watch too many schola gladiatria videos? - When Matt Easton appears in your dream in a seminar on history to teach you about armour.
About the scale/mail roman armour you mentioned. This may have been the type known as "lorica plumata". Lorica "squamata" being the regular scale protection. In some archaeological examples, the scales were as small as one square centimeter, to which no less that four rings were attached. You may imagine how long it took to make one. Certainly horribly expensive as well, reserved for tribunes and primi ordines centurions. Very efficient too, since it combined the excellent protection of mail with the quite good protection of scale. Anyways, love your videos. The one anout fancy swordplay vs. efficient swordplay is hilarious.
An important note about scale armor is that when combining mail with scales they compliment each other very well. The biggest threat against someone in mail is arrows like bodkins and hits from heavy weapons that would crush more then cut. Scales on top of mail would help against those kind of attacks by distributing the attack to a larger area.
Modern scale armor is coming back, actually. They're quite bullet resistant if you layer them correctly, they transfer energy very well. Nevermind, Refer to Crackabox's comment below. he explains the fact dragon armor was rejected by the US military and their shortcomings.
They have the same problem scale armor in history had. If the bullet comes from a downward angle it will penetrate it relatively easy. And its hevier then nother alternatives
+Amiibo Charles Not really. Dragon skin was actually rejected by the US military for being inefficient. Msnbc didn't do their job correctly when reporting it, now the internet thinks scales are a good idea. In actually, when you layer them you greatly increase the weight, and you can't thin it out otherwise you run the risk of the plates craking. Also, there doesn't seem to be an affordable adhesive that you can use that could withstand extreme conditions on a battle field. Prior to testing, all plates must go through a variety of extreme conditions (conditions that exist in the battlefield). This includes high temperatures (160+ F), low temperatures, (-60 F), diesel fuel, oil, and salt water immersion. When the military tested this new technology, they found that most of the plates had fallen to the bottom rendering it useless and bullets almost always went through by the second shot.
I imagine that (with the weakness to upward strikes that you mentioned) scale armor was mainly for protection against missile weapons (arrows or sling stones).
Jonathan Hughes or against anybod that didn't want to come within dagger range, in which case lamellar armor wouldn't help your opponent either. (if you hadn't had your head chopped off yet trying to get that close, that is)
I would like to mention here that scale armor was not always a single layer of scales, and that if you have two or three layers of scales that are offset (so that there is no gap through which one can thrust) then you have a fairly decent armor. I do also realise that it would be rather difficult to have three offset layers of scales, as it would lead to a very stiff armor, and it would be rather hard to find a way to sew on three layers of scales, buy two layers are completely feasible.
Well it was used a lot in the eastern roman empire but no one ever really mentions it. Why is that i wonder, an empire over 1000 years long and people seldomly reference it
***** Probably for that same reason because it was to awesome. Keep in mind that even though Byzantium was awesome it was regarded as "heretic" state by Western Europeans back than and Western armies actually were conducting their Crusade expeditions on Byzantium as much as on Middle East.(and always loosing big time). So modern Western Historians are bias for that reason, because their ancestors saw Byzantium as Evil and competitor to Rome and Pope.
+ShaNagmalmmuru Well there aren't any movies or series about Byzantium and that's the reason only a minority of people know it's history in the West. How many people knew what Sparta was before the 300 movie? May I add that for the most part the Byzantine rulers were murdering each other for power? Constantine the Great, for example, had wiped out half of his family for "safety", under directions from his mother Empress Helen, and it is rumored that these two were lovers (a Norman/Norma Bates style relationship). In some cases brother blinded brother to gain the throne because mutilated people were not allowed to rule (any sort of mutilation) and blinding was considered "mercy". I don't consider all the above a very family friendly thing to watch. I am from Greece and right now the Byzantine times remain a very controversial historical subject, some people perceive it as an era of christian terror and others think it was a paradise thanks to the egalitarian laws passed by emperors from time to time. Even though a Hollywood movie/HBO or Showtime tv series based on Byzantium would surely spark angry Christian mobs and rough criticism I would still like to see it (not the story of an ultra-badass muscular christian warrior killing Seljuks and banging princesses but a story of a scheming Emperor like Alexius Comnenus that escapes danger and expands his empire thanks to his wit and cunning). Sorry for the long text.
Scales do overlap quite a bit and in order to go underneath them you would need quite and angle, so forget about spears or even swords. Also, the scale armors I saw were usually riveted to a leather shirt, which would make it harder to move the scales upwards - in fact, than you would need an angle so steep that you could barely scratch the person wearing or more likely the padding worn beneath.
I think this is the first time I leave a comment on a video of yours, Mr Easton...I just wanted to compliment you for your enthusiastic work and the great usefulness, completness and clarity of your explanations. Please forgive any of my possible english mistakes
@scholagladiatoria Polish late XVII husarz used 'karacena' but it was inferior on protection and lighter to husarz plate armor, it was for parades and alike mostly, but still used in battle :)
The Teng Dynasty paper armor has actually been shown to not only be very cheap and durable, but also stops arrows, which is important on the battlefield. It's also referenced quite often in documents from that time.
I can imagine several potential reasons why one would have used scale armour historically. First of all, like you suggest, it is very easy to make. Essentially the same components as lamellar, just put together in a less efficient, but also less time consuming manner. In the field, you might not have immediate access to competent armourers or you might not have the time or inclination to do it properly - which would certainly explain the partial scale examples seen in art. "Meh, it's just the shoulder, I don't need anything fancy. I don't get any attacks aimed upward there anyway that I can't otherwise defend against. I can do it myself in half an hour or I can wait three days for that blasted armourer to get around to it, and then that idiot apprentice of his will probably just give it to someone else by mistake, like what happened last time. Goddamn armour dealers..." Second, it is perfectly adequate against arrows, rocks and the like. Third, possibly less importantly, if you're wearing scale armour, you have a certain level of predictability as to where most of the attacks will be coming from.
I liked what you said about how historical peoples represented past eras in "sci fi" ways as well, or had their own types of fantasy settings. I think the "exotic other people" armor phenomenon is why elves usually have scales. You says it's a poor armor, I think the idea was "the other guys figured out a way to get it right, or have better tech."
Search "karacena". It's a scale armor from The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It wasn't used to often. Plate armor was a liked a lot more of course. Althought it was used by Jan III Sobieski and some of the hetmans(Late XVIII century). They started a trend. People liked it because it was something egzotic and weird.
It is interesting to mention that while Eastern Roman heavy cavalry (namely the cataphracts) used lamellar, their lamellar was overlapping from the bottom up, and the small plates were "hanging upwards" if you will, in contrast to the lamellar used by infantry. That was because if an enemy soldier stood nearby and hit them with a spear, the angle often made it easy for a point to get upwards through the gaps. And so, the lamellar worn by cataphracts, mounted officers, etc., had reverse overlapping. Source - twcenter forums.
Scale seems like it would be a very effective armor, it's the only thing even close to being as flexible as mail and it would provide much better protection from piercing weapons even though it would be weak to upwards thrusts thats still a lot better than any thrust from a pointy weapon like mail is vulnerable to.
I like your videos, they're very informative. Though, I have a suggestion. You may want to consider adding pictures to your videos that are relative to what you're saying on screen at that time. For example, when talking about that roman scale armor you mentioned, you could place an image somewhere on the screen with it, for viewers to better visualize it. Just a suggestion =)
Scale armor in Europe actually became popular among the famous Polish winged hussars, somewhere in the early 17th century. Due to both oriental influence (Ottoman style was very trendy in Poland) and to Roman (Sarmatian) revival, the scale armor became more popular than the usual plate half-armour the hussars used to wear. Even some helmets were decorated with scales ! This scale armor (named karacena) was actually much heavier and less protective that its plate counterpart, so it is argued that it might have been used mostly as a parade armour, with the plate armour remaining in use in battle.
Scale armour was used quite extensively over the top of mail in the Rus due to it's lighter weight and lower cost over full plate allowing much larger portions of the fighting force to be well armoured
Scale armour was used extensively in Eastern Europe, 2500-2000 years ago by Thracians, and especially by Sarmatian Roxalans, that had them even for horses. You can see them on Trajan's Column, or in Thracian tombs. If the scales are metal, and secured with rivets, on a thick backed boiled leather, they were good enough for up thrusts with blades from that era, except for well aimed lance blows from the horseback. This armour and the use of heavy cavalry, helped the Sarmatians to overun the lighter armed skythians, to become masters of the steppe. Native Americans didn't have scale armour, as far as I know.
Scale is also easier to draw than complicated joints. So diagrams using it may simply have reflected a lazy draftsman rather than an actual suit of armor. Chainmail is actually still in use for some applications. A chainmail glove is used as protection against cuts for some kitchen tasks (such as cleaning a meat slicer or opening oyster shells) while a some divers wear a chainmail shark suit to protect against bites.
The Japanese had fish scale armor called gyorin kozane. In ancient China they had a scale armor that was even made of paper, and Mythbusters even proved through a series of tests that it help up as well or better than steel armor. Though I have to assume that part of all ancient armor either had boiled leather or multiple layers of dense clothing, such as silk or linen, underneath that performed much of the armoring. Even today we see ballistic soft body armor based on the scale armor principal called Dragon Skin by Pinnacle Armor, which uses a series of overlapping ceramic discs. But I think you are completely right about scale armor not really being a thing in Europe. And if it ever was, I think it probably predated steel armor and was only used to cover certain parts of the body. There are just too many examples of superior armoring techniques from Europe when armor was common. Semper Fi
The Mythbusters test was pretty solid, though they didn't use a very good gambeson for the metal one, and they didn't do any thrusts from below - something that immediately started bugging me even back when I first saw it. Still, I've seen worse tests of armor vs arrows on longbow pages...
One thing I remember about that episode that permanently turned me off Mythbusters, is that one of the weapons in the background of their lab was a bludgeon, a two handed spiked club. Such a weapon would have zero trouble killing a man through the armor, and was otherwise conveniently missing from the episode. Did they bring in a weapon that they never even considered using, just as a prop? Despite knowing full well that it could disprove their results? I offer that it's performance was probably deleted from the episode so that the whole exercise didn't seem like a complete waste of time. Marking the episode as a sham, and destroying the Mythbusters credibility in my eyes.
I think the ancient Chinese KNEW paper armor was not the best. That is why the the generals in ancient Chinese warfare wore METAL armour. However that is not the point. the chinese wanted to SAVE MONEY on manufacturing effective armor for their large numbers of EXPENDABLE foot soldiers.For what it is paper armor was good.
I had a swatch of that Roman style scale armor from the Maille Research Society, back when they released volume 2. It appears to be 100% decorative, as it is so finely linked that I'm sure I could punch my way through it. Need to reread that issue...
I seem to recall that, in one of the Osprey Men-at-Arms books, there was a drawing of a mounted Byzantine heavy cataphract covered, both man and horse, in what appeared to be scale armor
Bit of PC here, but as a Canadian it was suggested to me, thirty years ago, that using the word eskimo, or eater-of-raw-meat was pejorative and faux pas. We say Inuit, which is what they call themselves; means people.
As far as I know, scale armour was mainly used in asia, amongst different riding folks, that had mainly to deal with arrows (which would normally point downward due to gravity) and lances/spears The roman Empire ditched scale armour fairly soon, because it's a little heavier, due to the need of the layer you attach the scales on, this additional weight furthermore increasing, when it starts to rain, as the sublayer started to soak the water in.
I'd like to point that there was a special kind of scale armour created and used in Poland from the 16th up to 18th c. Its name was Karacena, (corazzina from Italian) and it was quite widely used by the Polish armed hussars. Animal furs and skins were used under and/or over neath it. The Karacena was directly inspired by the engravings on the Trajan's Column, where that type of scale armour was used in the past. Kind of an interesting subject on the topic of scale armours :D
The Bulgarians often used scale armour but we were dominantly horseman like horse archers and atc. But it was also used for the infantry together with mail .
I think you forgot to mention the number one reason scale armor wasn't very popular. Lamellar armour existed. It offers better protection, at a slight expense to flexibility, and it cost the same to make and maintain.
+copycat2025 I was going to basically make this point. Lamellar (where the the scales are laced together, rather than riveted to a canvas, leather, or chainmail surface,) was ubiquitous across many cultures - everything from Norse to Chinese. To a degree, it's actually easier to make as it doesn't require you to construct a separate garment.
The Chinese had a composite armor literally made of paper. Dozens of layers glued together and cut into scales. Around half an inch thick or so. From what I understand they mainly effective against arrows.
Scale armour was actually longest used non organic armour in history. Dating from the bronze age until the 19c. Its heyday in europe seemed to be the 13-14th centuries after which it largely was replaced by brigandines which filled the same role, as affordable decently protective armour that could be worn in addition to mail. (flemish and spanish artworks and surviving suits from Spain and Russia) In the rest of the world it continued to be used by diverse peoples. China, Korea, Japan, Cambodia, Tibet, Apache and Tlingit, Borneo, Sulawesi and India until the 1700s and possible later in some cases.
yea i had the impression from "kingdom of heaven" where Saladin was wearing leather scales(I believe) that it was a persian or desert peoples thing. And that made sense to me based on the idea of them observing reptiles in their habitat but now that he mentions the exotic foriegners/fantasy angle, that makes even more sense.
And mails too, mostly riveted of course. In fact, lots of suppose scale/lamellar armor with seemingly small scales/plates depicted in some of the East Asian art works were actually mail armors! Same goes for some of the European art works too. Military historians wouldn't assume the armors shown in Bayeux Tapestry to be scale/lamellar armor would they/we?
I just completed a scale shirt, done in aluminum, a couple of weeks ago. Using the method that I did, linking the scales that have 5/16" holes with rings that have 5/16" inner diameter holes, armour that is made in this way would be every bit as protective to an upward thrust as would be similarly made chainmail, if the opponent was thrusting in the direction of the chain's hang. This, in addition to also being more protective vs. attacks that come from above (like projectiles) or from the side.
You're right, that type of "scale mail" would certainly be all-round more protective than regular chainmail. I guess Matt is talking about scales attached to a leather/cloth backing in this video.
I had read or heard somewhere that both scale armor and "ring" armor didn't actually exist and were just misinterpretations of medieval artwork depicting mail.
If i recall, the lamellar armor i wore was bound together in a way that the weak point was on the top right. While it doesn't eliminate the weak angle problem, it certainly prevented a simple counter.
The scale mail I made is a European 4-in-1 weave with one of the rings comprising of a scale. ( I make no attempt at recreating historical works) It would be definitely be good with slashing attacks, and maybe a little more padded against concussion (vs mail), but pricing blows, especially upwards would be very effective against it. There are rings protecting from an upwards thrust, but the scales, would make sure the point translates it's force into the mail.
You can make scale armor resistant to upward stabs by limiting the angle the scales can be lifted up. Thus the sword would have to penetrate at an impractical angle, which limits the debth of the wound. However, in that case the stiching would be exposed to swordblows, unless you use rivetting, which resulted eventually in the brigandine. Alternativly you have to increase the overlap, but this would probably double the amount of scales used. In either case the flexibility becomes restricted.
while I see the point for the armor depicted however I have seen examples of oriental armor that do not fall for the weakness. while they may have been mentioned in the video in brief they were not described. the armor has three leaves the top leaf having a hole and the lower leaves having upwards projections that lock in to the surrounding scales. this is not the source I use but this is the appearance of the armor. www.guildcompanion.com/scrolls/2011/nov/3.1.Scale.jpg
+Sean Rea how flexible could a shape like that really be? i am interested in making my own scale armor as an introduction into forging, and this shape is very intriguing.
I would like to see the up-thrust weakness of scale armor tested. I do not believe it was easily achieved, neither do I believe that a successful attack meant the recipient was doomed---and upward strike still had under layers to penetrate and at an angle that still admitted the blade to thoracic or abdominal cavity. SHOW ME, as they say in Missouri. TEST IT, and PROVE IT.
+Michal Gaik That's a common misconception. Rivetted mail does great against all but the most powerful bows at short range. Scales on top of mail might offer a bit more protection, but scales alone would do rather horrible against arrows, because it easily catches the point and offers none of the ability to glance off that plate armour does.
+Finkeren u should check out lindybeige's video on arrow head types, there are arrows designed specifically to stab through mail, also riveted mail isn't the only kind that existed & was generally the best version as far as i'm aware
+Sean Madson I've watched most of Lindybeiges videos (including the one you mention), and while there are indeed arrowheads that seem to have been designed for maximum penetration, they still do fairly poorly against maille at longer ranges. The exception seems to be, when using reproduction arrowheads made of hardened steel. They can indeed break maille (even penetrate relatively flat pieces of plate armour) but here's the problem: Of the thousands of medieval arrowheads that have been found exactly none of them are made of high-carbon, work hardened steel. Arrowheads are generally made from either low grade steel or wrought iron and for good reason: During battle an experienced archer could shoot off an entire longswords worth of good, hardened steel. The cost would've been enormous.
+Finkeren i can imagine scale armour doing well against arrows even better than maille since maille might catch the tip of an arrow while scale would lead the blow downwards. i imagine this to be useful on longer distances when the arrows come down pointed downwards. if you think about how the energy would be spread it seems logical. but i think it wouldn't do very well against straight hits. so i think it would be a very good addition to maille armour but wouldn't be very usefull without anything beneath it.
Hey man, love your videos Have you made a video on flambergs and other weapons with wavy blades? Also, I really enjoy when you use real historical accounts in your videos, could you make a video where you talk about the most interesting examples you've found through your research?
chain mail allows far greater force intrusion than does scale which SPREADS the force of the blow -- thats why weightlifting platforms are more thick wood than rubber matting (often theres a combo) so that the rubber absorbs the force of dropped weights and the plywood spreads the hit over a much wider area for less fracturing of the floor
Fascinating... My understanding was that they were made from the hide of a mystical dragon, and that if a knight who was not morally pure wore a set of this armor, he might become cursed to do the evil bidding of the dragon's ghost. There's just so much I did not know about scale armor. ;)
hi, nice video :-) Scale armour called "karacena" was popular in Poland in XVI and XVII century (but like You say, it was not so common like plate or mail armour). There are very nice examples of this kind of armour in Polisch Army Museum in Warsaw. There is olso an article with pics about karacena in wikipedia. Best regards :-)
My opinion is that alongside the more common maile scale armour has been a common armour type over a long period. It was exstensively used by the Persian empires, Roman lorica squamata was a scale armour without mail backing and was used for the same period that lorica hamata was used. I think the effectiveness of a good scale armour would rely on several things: Size of scale, security of attachment and each scale's overlap. With small enough scales and tight enough overlap thrusting can be countered. Also scales were sometimes loosely riveted to the scale beneath which seemingly counters this issue effectively, this seems to be common in the Byzantine empire and Russian city states. A great example of this armour used in a western context would be that of of Sir Albrecht von Hohenlohe of the early 14th century.
+Destructive Criticism yes, but mostly lamellar. i think they used scale for their horses, because lamellar wasnt flexible enough, but i ant sure about that. still, the majority if their armor was lamellar if i remember correctly
Scale armor was the first armour known and was used heavily from the bronze age into the medieval age. Scale armor is always sewn into a medium, usually leather but sometimes mail. Not sure what you are on about at all tbh.
I'm making a suit of scale: It's basically box mail armour (4-1 links) with the centre link being the scale. I don't think there's that much of an issue regarding upward thrusts - you need to either get quite close to get a good angle for it, and it looks like you'd just snag your weapon if you succeeded. It could depend on the size of scales, and linking rings, of cause, but... no, not sure it's that big an issue.
hi matt, i wanted to know if you could do a new vid about scale armor, a more detailed one, with examples of what it would look like, because i am interested in it. and i would love to have a detailed video about what it would look like and how it was depicted from a country to an other.
FWIW scale armor was used by settlers in the Spanish Americas for some time later than one would expect, and was apparently of local manufacture. This was riveted to a canvas backing if I remember correctly. I suppose it was of value against native arrows and easy to manufacture.
Scale armour seems to have been used quite widely in Asia and parts of Eastern Europe during the classical era. I've seen some very well-preserved examples from Scythian burials. Never underestimate the value of ease of manufacture and repair in making something popular- it's no use making the best, fanciest armour if nobody can afford to own it. Scale armour would have offered a decent level of protection from arrows and spears, (which are the main weapons anyone in the ancient world was likely to encounter anyway), and would have been straightforward to repair if it got damaged. It could also be worn underneath other clothing, mitigating the risk of someone attempting to defeat it by stabbing upwards- Herodotus describes this specific scenario. In book 9 of Histories, he describes the killing of the Persian cavalry general Masistius, who has just been thrown to the ground from his horse: "As soon as Masistius landed on the ground, the Athenians sprang forward, seized the horse and killed Masistius, although he fought back. At first, in fact, they failed to kill him: next to his skin he was wearing a breastplate made of gold scales, with a red tunic on top, so the Athenians' blows kept hitting the breastplate and achieving nothing. Eventually one of them realised what was happening and struck Masistius in the eye. Only then did he fall down and die." Elsewhere Herodotus specifically criticises the Persian army for being largely unarmoured, so presumably only a few elite soldiers like Masistius actually had this equipment in Xerxes' army, but it still shows that scale armour could be used effectively in combat, and was capable of stopping blows from stabbing weapons. I presume the scales were actually made of iron or bronze, and plated with gold, rather than solid gold, which would be an absolutely dreadful material for armour. Scale seems to have been considered a worthwhile type of armour until lamellar armour became widespread, which worked in a similar way, just better.
A major thing about scale armour is that triangles and/or diamonds are much easier to draw than thousands of tiny interweaving circles, my point here being, there is a good chance that quite a number of the artworks showing what appears to be scale armour are actually just representing chain mail with some lazy drawing.
RE depictions of armour in historical artwork: These always tended to be realistic contemporary armour. Not till maybe the 18th and 19th century did artists get creative with armour depictions, probably because it wasn't used in war anymore. Before that historical, mythological or religious scene would most often be depicted anachronistically with the current armour of the day.
Excellent and informative video matt! But one thing to point out is that lorica squamata was just scales stitched to a rigid under garment, whereas lorica plumata had its scales directly attached to lorica hamata. But still, I'd wear maille underneath a lorica squamata.
Pretty sure scale was quite common among all the steppe tribes, various persian empires and the Romans with their Lorica squamata. Very few examples survived likely do to the backing degrading and rotting away and the scales being repurposed.
It is possible to wear ordinary scale armor in a manner that is not vulnerable to upward thrusts. Simply wear two layers of scales, the inner one "inside out" (scales facing in), the other facing out. If the scales are 2 units wide and 3 units tall, with a repeated row pattern of { row facing in; shift one unit left; row facing out }, with rows spaced one unit vertically, then there are three layers of scales at any point and no vulnerable gaps either vertically or horizontally to thrusts or hacks either upward or downward. All the scales could be the same shape, too; flat would work but inward-facing scales curved like "(" and outward facing the same shape, turned to look like ")" would be a bit better for a few reasons.
I also think that often scale armour is confused with lamellar armour, contributing to the perception of how widespread it is. Most non-history buffs have heard of scale armour, but wouldn't know what lamellar armour was if you mentioned it to them and would just assume it was scale armour if they saw it in a film or game.
I know for a fact some Polish Winged Hussars wore scale armor, but i am not entirely sure if they wore it into battle. for that matter, I'm not even sure if they wore their wings into battle either
I guess 'scale armour' in many fantasy rulebooks is eerything that is made out of steel plates but not a 'full plate' armour. So the pieces of steel are smaller. That would include lamellar and brigandine.
I just looked up Lammelar armor. Wow! Very intriguing. I've seen the type before but never put a name to it. Many people have asked this below, but was it effective?
I know the Russians wore their scale over a chain hauberk. I would assume the scales helped mitigate the crushing blows while the chain did the dirty work on the thrust.
The Egyptians and Persians actually made use of it. The Ancient, Early egyptian generals and higher ranking officers used it (it was the only metal armor avaiable, not even breastplates were yet invented). And Persian Cavalry made a large use of it (even tho it wasnt that effective. Also they didnt have breastplates or mail so they had to use whatever they could lay they ancient hands on).
