Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Why did fluted armour lose popularity? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 4:56 pm    Post subject: Why did fluted armour lose popularity?         Reply with quote

Fluting is probably the easiest way to strengthen armour without adding weight. Yet it seems like after the mid 16th century, fluting on armour was minimal.
Why did it fade out, after being so popular during the Maximillian era?
View user's profile Send private message
Evan Jones




Location: Michigan
Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Reading list: 4 books

Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 6:33 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It's to my understanding that it was just terribly labor-intensive to make. It was wonderful armor in terms of a weight-to-strength ratio, but the amount of skill (and therefore money) it took to produce that type of armor made it too un-economical ( <-- technical term?) of an armor, especially once renaissance armors came about, what with their fancy-schmancy with multi-lamed segments.
"Love and serve your friends, hate and harm your enemies..." -Geoffroi de Charny
View user's profile Send private message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 7:05 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I think that's at least part of the reason.
Later field armour seems to have largely been on the functional yet undecorated side.
Perhaps cuirassiers' didn't have the same status as knights had, hence their slightly simpiler armour.
View user's profile Send private message
Tim Lison




Location: Chicago, Illinois
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Likes: 1 page
Reading list: 6 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,503

PostPosted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 11:05 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The changing battlefield likely played a part in it's demise as well. Firearms were becoming more potent and more common. Why spend the time and money to make fluted armor when it's less and less effective?
View user's profile Send private message
Stephen Curtin




Location: Cork, Ireland
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Likes: 110 pages
Reading list: 18 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,147

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 2:19 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Tim Lison wrote:
The changing battlefield likely played a part in it's demise as well. Firearms were becoming more potent and more common. Why spend the time and money to make fluted armor when it's less and less effective?


Yes I also think that it was mainly the rise of firearms which saw the decline in fluted armour. I would just like to add that I heard somewhere (dont ask me where) that later pieces of armour had to be made thicker to stop musket balls. This is why from say 1520 on you see armour covering less and less of the body, going from the fully armoured knight on barded horse, to fully armoured knight on unarmoured horse, to three quarter armour to half armour to just cuirass and helm. I also heard that the quality of the steel matter less against musket balls and it was the thickness which mattered, so increased thickness ness means increased weight, which means discarding pieces to remain modile. There may be some great oversimplifications on my part going on here but I'm no expert on the subject.

Éirinn go Brách
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Al Muckart




Location: NZ
Joined: 27 Dec 2005

Posts: 309

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 2:29 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Fashion, as much as anything I suspect. The style of armours changes dramatically and even during the 15th century fluted armour was very much a German thing, the Italians were doing quite different styles.

I think the role of heat treating probably played a part as well. In the time when fluted Maximillian armour was popular heat treating was practically nonexistent, and was terribly hit-and-miss when they did try it. From what I've read, by the end of the 16th century it was getting better, though it was still very imprecise and seems to have been successful more by accident than design.

--
Al.
http://wherearetheelves.net
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lucas Simms




Location: Washington
Joined: 14 Mar 2010

Posts: 33

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 3:09 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

probably has something to do with the relatively flat areas between the flute lines, which could probably "catch" a musket ball and let it use it's force to it's full potential
Lucas
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,188

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 8:23 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
In the time when fluted Maximillian armour was popular heat treating was practically nonexistent, and was terribly hit-and-miss when they did try it.


That's not what I remember from reading Alan Williams. Instead, I recall that heat treatment peaked right around the time of fluted armor's popularity in the early sixteenth century and then declined.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 12:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Yeah, in a book I read, The Knight and the Blast furnace, they had metalurgical results on a number of armour pieces. A piece from 1395 Italy was hardened, medium carbon steel, with a measured VPH 374.
And pieces from later dates got more consistent in their being hardened. (To a certian point, then I believe steel quality declined somewhat.)

Now that firearms are mentioned, I think that's probably why. Fluting strengenthens against sword blows, etc. by making the armour more rigid, though firearms are mostly penetration, and fluting would have probably had a negligable effect against them.
View user's profile Send private message
Adam D. Kent-Isaac




Location: Indiana
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Reading list: 2 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 12:39 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Cavalry were still going up against lances, pikes and swords regularly when Maximilian armour went out of style. I'd say its decline had more to do with fashion than function.
Pastime With Good Company
View user's profile Send private message
David Teague




Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Joined: 25 Jan 2004

Posts: 409

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 5:35 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Adam D. Kent-Isaac wrote:
Cavalry were still going up against lances, pikes and swords regularly when Maximilian armour went out of style. I'd say its decline had more to do with fashion than function.

And shot...

I'm well in the "firearms had a major thing to do with it " camp thanks to the rise in quality of the matchlock muskets in use.

Cheers,

David

This you shall know, that all things have length and measure.

Free Scholar/ Instructor Selohaar Fechtschule
The Historic Recrudescence Guild

"Yea though I walk through the valley of death, I will fear no evil: for Thou's sword art is with me; Thy poleaxe and Thy quarterstaff they comfort me."
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 8:18 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Two points to me come to mind-

One is that, from what I have seen, no one has ever proved fluted armour was thinner on average than the non-fluted counterparts. From the pieces I have seen this has never been the case.

Two is that there is a large amount of 16th century armour that was fluted just less and less as the century goes on. My guess is that eventually it was just not seen as really being worth the time investment to its defensive use.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Edward Lee




Location: New York
Joined: 05 Jul 2013

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Fri 19 Jun, 2015 12:17 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It seems later 16th century armors had etching and gilding for decoration purpose. Was fluting on Gothic armor the same purpose as for those one piece breastplate with a medial ridge in terms of functionality? If the medial ridge is also fluthing.
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,158

PostPosted: Fri 19 Jun, 2015 12:52 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Because fashion.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 801

PostPosted: Fri 29 Jul, 2016 8:23 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Its fashion, cost effectiveness and efficacy. There's no one reason and everyone's reason for phasing it out will be gradually different. If I had to pick one though its cost.
Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Why did fluted armour lose popularity?
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum