Re: Another Armor question .
That could be one of the arguments in further setting the distinction between the two types, however it is more than that; Lamellar armour consists of lamellae that are fully attached to the base cloth, through rivets and whatnot, while scale only has the top attached to the base cloth. Let me demonstrate this further:
Lorica Squamata
Lacing technique for Lamellar
It's easier to see the difference if one could properly animate the quirks of this armour type when the horseman is riding; The armour "dangles" or "jingles" or however you'd like to see it. It will of course differ depending on materials and where the armour-smith decided to set the rivets, but the principle is the there. In the matter of conceiving designs scale is typically accredited of having the edges scalloped, however that is a technicality, as the scales could practically be of any feasible size and dimension. Lamellar, through its different attachment does not behave in this manner. It has little to do with overlapping, because an oven-man coat of lamellar can be arranged in an overlapping style as well.
Another difference is the feel; While scale is appraised for providing excellent protection against archery, it was not very flexible at all, and there was a huge problem for a long time in how to work around the issue on extending protection to the arms. This is partly where laminated armour was conceived, and partly where the advantages of lamellar as a more flexible solution would arise; The main difference is their field of application also. Lamellar is more often used as a "supplement", like on top of chain maille, or scale armour, and one could particularly make elaborate armoured jackets or coats out of the technique as well.
It's a bit difficult to generalize on the issue, but after a while you can easily spot a scale-configuration from the lamellar-counterpart and tell them apart.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks