Historical Abilities of Lamellar Armor

[kannonfyre]

To all SCA, ARMA or THR weapon historians....

What was leather lamellar armor historically designed to counter?

If a padded jacket was worn underneath it, which medieval or pre-medieval threats could it stop? For instance, was it of any use against broadhead arrows shot from a light bow with say....40lbs of drawweight at 30 yards? Could it resist the slash from a gladius type sword?

Can anyone here point me towards modern day tests done on lamellar reproductions?

 

[hso]

See the guys at swordforums. They are a pretty good source for real performance of bladed weapons against armor.

 

[rcmodel]

Could it resist the slash from a gladius type sword?

A good Roman solder with a Gladius would have came up from under his shield and stuck you right in the gizzard with it.
Under your armor.

That's why the Gladius was a "short sword", not a slashing long or broad sword.

rc

 

[kannonfyre]

To Hso:

Swordforums has been shut down.

To rcmodel:

If we disregard tactics for a moment, could leather lamellar resist a gladius slash?

To Everyone:

Have anyone here ever worn lamellar armor? How is it's "wearability" factor vis-a-vis chain or plate armor under HOT and HUMID conditions?

 

[hso]

To Hso:

Swordforums has been shut down.

No, it hasn't.

http://swordforum.com/articles/ams/cavalrycombat.php

 

[Dirty Bob]

I've worn lamellar made of sole leather, over a sweatshirt, in hot weather. Took a full-force rattan sword to the ribs. I definitely felt it, but I wasn't hurt at all. Leather lamellar is great against impact, and a less-than-perfect slash might be turned, but I doubt it would stop arrows, spears, or sword thrusts. I'd go with a steel breastplate for those. It's good SCA armor, however.

All my best,
Dirty Bob

 

[Zoogster]

Leather lamellar is great against impact, and a less-than-perfect slash might be turned, but I doubt it would stop arrows, spears, or sword thrusts. I'd go with a steel breastplate for those.

Yes it does not stop direct penetrating attacks. It may not stop a full force unopposed slash either.
However in an actual fight a full power slash that connected against someone with a sword and shield would be less common than a deflected blow that still connects with some force.
The armor would allow you to actually fight without every time a blade touched you tissue being damaged.
It would mean partially parried attacks, or those imperfectly deflected by a shield would probably not bite into tissue when they came into contact with the leather after losing most of their momentum.

It may stop some arrows at some ranges and not others. But even those not stopped would be unlikely to penetrate as deeply.

Now consider what even just the weight of a sharp sword blade dragged across lightly clothed skin would do. Or with enough pressure to cut through a steak. The leather would stop that and more, but not full power attacks.

It could also be worn over mail. It would then absorb much of a blow as the blade cut into the leather, and the mail would then stop the blade. While pure mail would have been easily penetrated.
A mail and leather combo was therefor far more effective than either would be alone of similar total weight.
Hardened leather gives and absorbs energy while the mail resists penetration.

Lamellar also used things beyond leather. Even a really thin layer of metal on the surface would cause a significant amount of deflection of blades not connecting at the perfect angle. So even blows it technically would not stop could be deflected to the side if they didn't land perfectly.

 

[CWL]

Leather lamellar armor was historically worn by medium to light troops, particularly cavalry. It allowed for flexibility and weight savings. Mounted bowmen, in particular wore this type of armor as it allowed them to shoot on-the-hoof while still providing a level of protection to deflect a slash or a turn a spent arrow (many cultures such as the Mongols and China, additionally wore layered silk underneath to catch arrows that penetrated the leather).

Leather was useful against swords (and the quality of most swords used in war wasn't that great), but not that great against spears and other pointed objects. It made more sense to wear leather in hot climates, even at sea, and was most effective in pre Iron Age warfare.

If a nation or individual could afford it, they always went with metal for HTH protection, however.

There was a short resurgence of leather for armor during the 17th Century (30 Years War), when metal armor was mostly abandoned, since firearms would penetrate metal armor anyways, but leather could still protect against swords.