Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

Only the ones that are significantly heavier than mail. Compare two examples of similar weight and mail will provide the best protection. It also provides much much better coverage since it is flexible enough to cover the whole body. Lamellar leaves significant gaps in the elbows, armpits, neck, etc and requires overlapping panels to cover the lower stomach and groin which still leave exploitable gaps.

Then why did scale and lamellar armours dominate some areas well after the introduction of mail? Price? Taste?

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

Sounds like we have a viking re-enactor who is a bit upset at being told he shouldn't be wearing lamellar. It was my belief that a re-enactor should be portraying the "typical" not the exception.

The difference between scale and lamellar is the backing. Scale consists of overlapping plates attached to a cloth or leather foundation. The direction of the overlap is irrelevant, the shape of the scales is irrelevant. Lamellar consists of small plates laced or wired together such that there is no need for a backing. There is some overlap such as scale armour in which the scales are laced to each other as well as the backing. Generally this is called "locking scale" but if the structure remains intact without the need for a foundation then it could technically be called lamellar. Using this definition, the earliest occurrence of lamellar is during the Warring States period in China. Everything used before this time has turned out to be scale.


Often lamellar was heavier than scale. Generally this was because thicker plates were used and there was more overlap between them. Though there is too much variation to make a general claim about weight. Lamellar has a few advantages over scale. It is less likely to shed scales in battle. More overlap provides better resistance against thrusting attacks (including arrows). IMO lamellar is an advanced form of scale. I don't really mind if scholars eliminate the term "scale armour" entirely and subsume it into the category of lamellar. It might be called something like "backed lamellar" or "reinforced lamellar".


What is your definition of "regular mail"? How do you account for the fact that the Romans made far greater use of mail than they ever did of scale or lamellar?


There is no evidence to suggest that even a single Scandinavian wore this armour during the so called "Viking period" outside of the Byzantine Empire. If we get into supposition you may as well equip a group of vikings in samurai armour based on the premise that they might have traded with Japan at some time. The only lamellar find so far uncovered during the viking period was at Birka and it has been clearly demonstrated not to have been of Scandinavian construction and was not worn by a Scandinavian. The only documentary evidence is the mention of a "spangabrnja" in one of the sagas. This could have been anything from scale to lamellar to an early coat of plates. And the sagas were written down a century or two after the viking period. Yes the Varangian Guard were issued lamellar if they couldn't afford a decent coat of mail. There is nothing to suggest that they were allowed to keep their state-owned equipment after they finished service and I can't think of a reason why they would want to. Their native mail byrnies offered superior protection and comfort. The main advantage of lamellar is that it is cheaper and faster to construct.


Yep. The word is derived through the Italian "maglia" from the Latin "macula" meaning the mesh of a net. The confusion arises from the Victorian tendency to use the word "mail" to describe all metal armour. Because of that, they needed a term to distinguish true mail from other types of armour (e.g. "scale mail", "plate mail", etc) hence the word "chain mail." It is covered in more detail here. http://www.knightsofveritas.org/mate...ndringmail.pdf

------------------------------------------------
QUOTE=DanHoward]Sounds like we have a viking re-enactor who is a bit upset at being told he shouldn't be wearing lamellar. It was my belief that a re-enactor should be portraying the "typical" not the exception.

I am not a reenactor and I assumed it was about what could be used in an RPG. Whether I sound like a reenactor is not relevant to the discussion at hand.
______________________________________________
What is your definition of "regular mail"? How do you account for the fact that the Romans made far greater use of mail than they ever did of scale or lamellar?

My definition of "regular mail" is linked rings-mail. I don't account for the discrepency above because I was in a hurry to look up my information and I admited that plainly. Much was from memory of material I hadn't read for a long time.
____________________________
There is no evidence to suggest that even a single Scandinavian wore this armour during the so called "Viking period" outside of the Byzantine Empire. If we get into supposition you may as well equip a group of vikings in samurai armour based on the premise that they might have traded with Japan at some time.

The supposition that evidence of such kind is necessary is flawed. All that is needed is evidence that it could not have taken place. And Japan was a red herring-I never claimed that Vikings were fammiliar with Japanese, only with (Central Asian)Turks. The Turks were within the Vikings sphere of influence and there is no reason to assume that some vikings would not have taken to lameller. The lack of evidence can be explained by a number of theories besides the assumption that it never took place. Records are destroyed, artifacts are lost, and so on. And there are things that simply havn't been found.
In a game all that is necessary is to know what is ordinary for a given time and place and how probable a given deviation might be. Deviations can be allowed for by "quirks", and "social stigmas" and whatever.
It is true that a reenactor should fit to type as he is representing that type.
However in an RPG it is the setting that has to fit to type. The PC's can be arranged in any manner that doesn't contradict the inner nature of the setting(unless the point of the game is being ridiculous, in which case the PC's have even looser boundries).

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

The supposition that evidence of such kind is necessary is flawed. All that is needed is evidence that it could not have taken place.

It is a logical impossibility to prove a negative. It is the responsibliity of those who support the positive hypothesis to provide evidence.

The Turks were within the Vikings sphere of influence and there is no reason to assume that some vikings would not have taken to lameller.

Except that there is no evidence to suggest that they did. It is irresponsible scholarship to make speculations without supporting evidence.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

It is a logical impossibility to prove a negative. It is the responsibliity of those who support the positive hypothesis to provide evidence.

____________________________________________
In the context given, that is another way of saying "I cannot prove you wrong therefore I must be right". I was merely saying it could have happend and saying it is impossible to prove that it could have happend is merely another way of saying that it could have.


________________________________________________
Except that there is no evidence to suggest that they did. It is irresponsible scholarship to make speculations without supporting evidence.

There certainly is evidence that the Vikings sphere of influence overlaped with the Turks. The Vikings regularly made trading voyages down the Russian rivers to the Black Sea.

As for "irresponsible scholarship", I was not aware that I was attending a history class. Or that I was writing a book. This thread is about RPG's. I was claiming that it was not implausible enough to throw out of court. Not that it actually happened. Not that it is even probable that it happened. But that the improbablity is not so great as to render it unjustified in a reasonably realistic game. I am not required to "refrain from making speculations without supporting evidence" all the time and it is pendantic to insist on such.

And ad hominims like "irresponsible scholarship"(and "pendantic" too I admit") are dirty pool. I would think it is possible to discuss matters in a civilized fashion if only because others have to listen to us.

[DanHoward]

There are RPGs and RPGs. If you want a fantasy campaign then you can equip your "vikings" in Siberian lamellar, or Samurai yoroi or Roman lorica segmentata. If you are interested in historical realism and you want an accurate Scandinavian from the viking period then you are limited to mail or nothing unless he is in a context no longer related to "viking" (e.g. Varangian Guard)

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Then why did scale and lamellar armours dominate some areas well after the introduction of mail? Price? Taste?

It takes a well established society to produce mail armour. Scale and lamellar are easier to produce in less industrially developed cultures. The strange exception is China. Dispite having access to Persian mail armour and acknowledging its effectiveness, they rarely used it themselves.

[Rupert]

What was the Chinese wire-making technology and industry like? Also, IIRC, the Chinese had access to iron that was high in phosphor and easy to cast. If this iron made poor wire, or was easy enough to cast into shapes useful for scale or lamellar, it may have simply not seemed economic to make mail.

[Verjigorm]

Again, does anyone have any ideas regarding the Solenarion? This thread isn't just for talking about amrour. :)

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

There are RPGs and RPGs. If you want a fantasy campaign then you can equip your "vikings" in Siberian lamellar, or Samurai yoroi or Roman lorica segmentata. If you are interested in historical realism and you want an accurate Scandinavian from the viking period then you are limited to mail or nothing unless he is in a context no longer related to "viking" (e.g. Varangian Guard)

_________________________________________________
That is not my point. My point is that even a reasonably RPG is ultimatly a historical fiction and speculation is not out of place in historical fiction. It is true that "oddities" should not be to the degree that would cause damage to the setting. Within that context the main requirement is that it be plausible that it "could have happend". I remember one quite good historical novel that had as a comic relief one of the heros desperatly trying to bring to the Philosophers at Athens a sample of a Pteradactol skull that had come down the trade routes to the Mediterranean mysteriously. Now that is not that probable-few merchants would have burdended themselves with something so chancy on an overland journey so it probably wouldn't have arrived in the first place. But odd things must have travelled down the trade routes once in a while. And indeed this is perhaps less improbable then other things in the story, like the characters who are merely distinguished merchants meeting great figures of Ancient History personally. In any case "could-have" is enough for a storytellers purpose.
The question then becomes of what use is it in the story or in an RPG game which is a kind of interactive story? Lameller armor would not be likly to form a major part of the plot. Two uses I could see. One would be as a character building device. Have one of the characters-not all of the characters, one of the characters-wear it as a quirk. The explanations could be various. He could have been given it by a captain he fought under in his travels in the east. He could have been promised by a local wizard that it would bring him good luck in battle(that would not make it a fantasy campaign-that would only make the character a superstitious character*). The question of whether to use this gimmick is aesthetic not intellectual.
It is true that speculation is not in place in serious historical research unless it is openly admitted to be speculation-a point which you did not allow for but which is in fact not uncommon in reasonably respectable histories(spy histories for instance, would obviously have a long row to hoe without being allowed to speculate and it is not dishonest to do so as long as the author does not claim more information then he has). However in Historical Fiction all that is necessary is that a device be explainable within the framework of the genre and that it not clash with the setting in an unaesthetic manner.


*I have sometimes thought it sounded like a good plot device in a Medieval game to make the actual players unsure whether they are playing in a fantasy game-their confusion will imitate a real person facing the unknown in an age that was less skeptical, or at least skeptical about different things.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Verjigorm

Again, does anyone have any ideas regarding the Solenarion? This thread isn't just for talking about amrour. :)

Searching for that word, only this post comes up. What is your question?