A History of Lamellar and Scale Armour in the West

[Kai]

Byzantine lamellar was much better

Based on what? There have been no sufficiently academic tests with lamellar armour remotely comparable to Cameron’s (Knight and the Blast Furnace) tests with mail - real mail, not the cheap online store mail. In fact the theoretical lamellar cuirass proposed by Timothy Dawson has not even been found and is the result of interpretation of artworks. Does one really have to say that this is methodologically highly problematic?

And I have not come across a single western source being in awe of the Byzantine or Arab or other eastern armour. On the reserve though, Arab and Byzantine accounts on the shocking effectiveness of the western knights’ armour are known. Technology transfer during the crusades is also pretty one sided. The Komnenian army, after being beaten, transformed into a more western way as J. Birkenmaier demonstrated.

By the way I do not think the one or the other is super superior in protective value: one cannot easily penetrate mail or lamellar well with one-handed weaponry short of the couched lance charge (although this statement goes in dubio pro reo favouring of the lamellar since it has not yet been tested properly; it may turn out that it does not protect as well...). In terms of possible coverage and flexibility on the one hand, and maintenance plus other non-combat factors on the other however, mail is quite a lot better.

I am totally willing to reconsider if a) a cuirass as proposed by Timothy Dawson has been found and b) academic tests (on Cameron's level) have been done.
If both is the case already and I just missed it, I apologize and would like to know more.