Plumata: Battle or Parade Armor.

[Tarbicus]

For me, parade armour would be worn for looking at, which begs the question of why on earth would there be mail below the scales at all if it was never seen? Within the context of a parade, it serves no function whatsoever, and merely creates an unnecessary hindrance to the wearer. It's logical, however, that the mail would add a level of protection which IMHO puts it firmly in a combat context.

There's too much focusing on the single thickness of the scales without taking the garment as a whole, which would be the combined thickness of both the scales and the rings.

[Dan Howard]

I see no reason to say that the plumata would be inferior to the squamata. I think it is highly more defensive. Unless the rivetting was very weak the construction fell apart quite easily. But I don't think this would be logical.

The problem is the mail, not the scales. The wire used for backing the scales is very thin. Riveted mail made from this stuff can easily be pulled apart in the hands. By itself it is weaker than textile IMO.

[Marcus Mummius]

I see no reason to say that the plumata would be inferior to the squamata. I think it is highly more defensive. Unless the rivetting was very weak the construction fell apart quite easily. But I don't think this would be logical.

The problem is the mail, not the scales. The wire used for backing the scales is very thin. Riveted mail made from this stuff can easily be pulled apart in the hands. By itself it is weaker than textile IMO.

That's the sort thing we should investigate and discuss!

[Tarbicus]

Is there any suggestion or evidence that the rings were sewn to a textile garment?

[SOCL]

Is there any suggestion or evidence that the rings were sewn to a textile garment?

If not that, then what about a sturdy subarmalis? Likely whoever owns a plumata would want to invest in making a good and sturdy subarmalis, perhaps one made of linen and leather? Wouldn't this also help, to a certain extent, the integrity of the armour?

[martijn.wijnhoven]

Is there any suggestion or evidence that the rings were sewn to a textile garment?

No, there is no evidence to support this.

The problem is the mail, not the scales. The wire used for backing the scales is very thin. Riveted mail made from this stuff can easily be pulled apart in the hands. By itself it is weaker than textile IMO.

Is this true? I do not know if any reliable reconstruction has ever been made which has been tested for strength. The diameter of the wire is indeed thinner, but there are also more rings per square cm (or inch). It might be compared to a hair: a single hair is easy to break; a bundle of hair is quite a different matter.

With kind regards,

Martijn

[martijn.wijnhoven]

Posted my comment by accident two times.


Cheers,

Martijn

[Erik D. Schmid]

My initial measurement of 1mm for the sclaes on the Newstead was in error as I have stated previously since then. However, I have been able to get a more exact measurement. The scales are actually 0.25-0.30mm thick. It also appears that the solid links were punched from the same material used to make the scales.

The strength of the mail is increased through the use of scales. For one thing they cover the mail thus protecting it. At any given moment there are at least two scales covering the mail and often times three. So, that gives you a common thickness of just under 1mm for this armour.

It has been suggested that the links of this type of mail would be quite frail due to the thickness of the wire used. What you have to consider though is the fact that the scales essentially turn four links into one. The scales turn this mail, which under normal circumstances would be worthless in terms of defensive capabilities, into something quite formidable in my opinion.

The manufacture of the scales strengthens them as well. This is accomplished through the introduction of the well known central rib. This rib is created through the use of a coining process and not simply whacking the underside with a hammer and chisel. The underside of the scale is flat. This indicates that the scales were made by coining. This process would thus work harden the scale thereby making it quite sturdy.

My research into this type of armour has taken me quite a distance from my first impression of it being parade/show armour.

The photo is of a link made with C24000, or Low Brass wire and is representative of the riveted links of the Newstead plumata.

[Franklin]

That's pretty effing tiny.

[Peroni]

This indicates that the scales were made by coining.

Could you please explain the term 'coining' Erik? I haven't come across this before.

all I could think of was the die method used to strike coins! :?

[Erik D. Schmid]

And you would be correct Adrian.

[Peroni]

Thanks Erik.. now to try it out!

[Marcus Julius]

I would have stood behind the idea of functional armor, however, I'm beginning to rethink that idea. I am thinking that replacing cloth with maille (the basic difference in this thread, as I'm understanding it), would be beneficial for show purposes. From what I have seen, the method of attachment to the maille allowed the scales (or feathers if you prefer) to dangle more freely, creating a better spectacle of light and sound than did squamata in which the scales are attached to one another, and then firmly sewn to the textile backing.

I used to think that the feathers added strength to the maille. Now, however, when I think about how freely they hang, perhaps there wouldn't be as much benefit from the scales.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Am I reading this correct, and you are saying the scales were attached over the mail. This is what I used to think was the norm when I was younger.......I am very interested now!! hock:

[Tarbicus]

I would have stood behind the idea of functional armor, however, I'm beginning to rethink that idea. I am thinking that replacing cloth with maille (the basic difference in this thread, as I'm understanding it), would be beneficial for show purposes. From what I have seen, the method of attachment to the maille allowed the scales (or feathers if you prefer) to dangle more freely, creating a better spectacle of light and sound than did squamata in which the scales are attached to one another, and then firmly sewn to the textile backing.

I used to think that the feathers added strength to the maille. Now, however, when I think about how freely they hang, perhaps there wouldn't be as much benefit from the scales.

You're still wearing added metal over a mail shirt. The argument that a better spectacle would apply more to a parade than battle doesn't hold up IMHO. The desired effect would make as much of an impression on the enemy as on spectators.