Since padding was being discussed earlier I might as well link this back to the Mamluks. I was reading an article called 'Know your weaons, know your enemy: a Mamluk training manual" by David Nicolle. Its basically a translation of some sections of a Mamluk furusiyya manual. One passage that was discussing the use of qarqals(padded garment) surprised me.

Quote:

Question What possesses even greater protective qualities than the jawshan? Answer A padded garment can be worn beneath the jawshan, as the Europeans wear beneath their iron cuirasses. This is the qarqal. It will protect the wearer from both heat and cold, and from the blows of maces and kafir kubat which soften the flesh and weaken the bones. If a mail hauberk is worn beneath it, then both protection and safety are found.

Although the manual states that the jawshan should be worn above the qarqal, it also reccomends that the mail be worn beneath the padding rather than above it. Any ideas why that would have been recommended? Also does the fact that the author of the manual identified the qarqal by referring to the Europeans "as the Europeans wear beneath their iron cuirasses" imply that such padded garments werent very popular among Muslim armies?

P.S. The Jawshan referred to in the passage is a lamellar cuirass.

Excellent. A good read. Does anyone have access to the original text to confirm the translation?

It confirms the use of lamellar over mail by the Mamluks

"A padded garment can be worn beneath the jawshan, as the Europeans wear beneath their iron cuirasses. This is the qarqal. It will protect the wearer from both heat and cold, and from the blows of maces and kafir kubat which soften the flesh and weaken the bones. If a mail hauberk is worn beneath it, then both protection and safety are found."

and adds further confirmation to Kozan's complaints about lamellar:

"Every day he must train himself to dismount elegantly so that he does not break or damage it, and he must keep practising and improving this skill. If, during the winter, the cuirass gets wet or damp from rain, he must examine its leather straps and its connections carefully and wipe off any dampness or mud from its individual pieces and any wetness from its cords. If he fails to do this, the inside of it will rot and it will become out of shape. Such rotting shows negligence and carelessness"

Quote:

Although the manual states that the jawshan should be worn above the qarqal, it also reccomends that the mail be worn beneath the padding rather than above it. Any ideas why that would have been recommended? Also does the fact that the author of the manual identified the qarqal by referring to the Europeans "as the Europeans wear beneath their iron cuirasses" imply that such padded garments werent very popular among Muslim armies?

I think it does. It also implies that wearing mail underneath the jawshan wasn't common either. Based on the time period I think he is referring to the European combination of coat of plates and pourpoint.

I have been trying to find the original Arabic version but I havent had luck so far.

Lamellar certainly wasnt a convenient form of armour. It no doubt would have been very uncomfortable fighting in Lamellar when it is raining. This certainly explains why it never gained popularity in Europe.

There are a few reasons where I can see why one would wear lammelar over mail. Obviously, the better protection is one of them. And yes, a 2nd layer of mail over the first would also provide protection, though I am not sure if lammelar over mail would be easier on the wearer than mail over mail.

I do agree that to provide the same protection level, lammelar would be heavier. Ran some numbers a while back ago figuring a 50% overlap, and what weight would be needed to provide similar protection as mail (using William's tests as a guide based on the resistance levels of various thickness of plate vs mail). iirc these correctly, to get similar protection the lammelar would be about 50% heavier. Lammelar might provide better protection though than a similar thickness of steel plate - it has a give to it that plate would not, though not as much give as mail

However, it should be cheaper (less labor intensive) than mail, and you can do more spot protection. A lammelar curiass is going to be lighter than a full mail hauberk.

Plus, a thinner lammelar plate could well have been used if over mail, much in the way that breastplates in the chain and plate period were thinnner than those when used in a suit of full plate.

As to the abilities of leather/cuir boilli/Leather Lammelar, I saw some testing on utube regarding this, and this actually appeared to be pretty well done. I'm not sure if it was schmid's mail or not, but it held up very well.

There was not any arrow testing, but testing vs swords predominantly and a two handed axe.

The results -
8 weight leather provide virtually no protection. Even 2 layers of such leather provided almost no protection, and you are talking now about 16 weight leather, which is very thick. Get much thicker and it becomes difficult to wear, as 16 weight is about moccasin bottom thickness.

Now, the treated leather (boiled) provided better protection - it was certainly not impervious to the attacks, but could absorb much of a sword cut, though it was not as good against thrusts, and an axe hacked it up pretty easily. But it still provided some decent protection.

Problems with the Boiled leather - It's stiff of course, so good for spot protection but not overall armour unless articualted like plate. Other problem - it should a lot of stress after defending from 1 or 2 attacks. Unless they had a much better way of treating this, even boiled leather spot protection would be almost disposable, a few good hits rendering it useless.

The one type of leather based armour that perform better was boiled leather lammelar. This resisted attacks very well, though not nearly as well as mail, though it turned aside anything but a very hard, direct trust, and even limited penetration with this. The give of the lammelar seemed to give it the ability to withstand attacks without being damaged much.

Thing here though - as Dan mentioned, Leather was not a cheap commodity. Throw in the labor to make lammelar, and you probably have something that would cost at least 50% or more as metal lammelar - at offer less prtection, and it would be far less durable, so it wold make a lot more sense to have steel lammelar if going that route.

The mail was pretty well impervious to the attacks, about the worst you would see would be a few deformed rings or possibly even a few cut rings, with virtually no penetration.

No metal lammelar was tested.

About the only use I could see for even the fairly efficient leather lammelar would be in a very hide rich but metal poor culture, possibly certain steppe nomads.

I would love to see that video. Can you post the link?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jpuSzgkZN4&feature=related

Above is the Link, Ahmad. It is a series of tests, but you can access all of them from there.

As I said, I'm not sure what quality mail was being used - but it's not that important. It does not show mail as vulnerable, it shows how superior it is to leather type armours.

I'd love to see some quilted material tested as well and compared to leather, though I don't think we truly know the exact construction of thes texxtile based forms of armour.

I've heard 16-24 layers of linen, that's about it :)

The problem with textile armours is that it is very hard to find the right kind of linen cloth. Modern cloths are often not woven as tightly as historical linen cloths and the thread is weaker due to the fibres being shortend so that machines intended for cotton can be used. I've seen some samples of handmade attempts to recreate historical linen cloths and the end result is rather diffrent the typical modern linen cloth. Strong threads and more of them in each square cm will produce a cloth which is more resistant to damage when layered.

Traditional long-fibre linen works for bowstrings. Likewise, silk. Both are among the best for woven textile armour. Hemp was/is used for bowstrings too. Is it also long-fibre? It's been used in East Asian textile armour, and for textile components of armour in East Asia. Was it used in Europe?

I just watched the video and I must say the hardened leather was impressive. It would be interesting to see a test done on wax hardened leather. As for quilted material, I imagine it would provide decent protection against sword cuts and maybe even arrows. But it probably wouldnt fair so well against spear thrusts. So far I havent found any tests on youtube.

Timo, as far as I know silk was not commonly used in European armour but I would bet that some French Knights would have worn silk shirts beneath their aketons during the hundred years war as additional protection from the dreaded bodkin arrows.