Cast Iron Armor and Mantlets (mantelets)

Shadowwolf

Banned
I was wondering.....

Would Cast Iron make good medieval armor?

I ask because I would imagine that it would be cheaper and quicker to make, but I am no expert on such things.

Also...

Would Iron mantlets (manetlets) be able to protect soldiers from mid-19th century guns?
Could an infantry line use a row of wheeled mantlets to protect them from enemy fire, while firing from gun-ports?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
This. Also, casting iron requires very high temperatures and the technology was not mastered in Europe until the late middle ages at even a fairly basic level. Chinese cast iron was in use earlier, but it shared the problems that early European stuff had: it's brittle and in order to get structural integrity, you need to cast it thick. Good for cookpots, useful for guns, lousy for anything that needs to be light and tough.
 

Shadowwolf

Banned
Thanks for the replies...

I was trying to think of ways that armor plate could be massed produced.

As to the mantelets, or mantlets as I have always seen it, I was wondering if they would work against muskets and such
 

Saphroneth

Banned
As to the mantelets, or mantlets as I have always seen it, I was wondering if they would work against muskets and such
To some extent, yes they would. Any kind of ablation reduces the impact effect.
To a usable extent? Ehhh... depends on the thickness. Certainly muskets could go straight through breastplates, hence why they were so valued given their inaccuracy, but a combination of iron over wood could potentially reduce the velocity of a musket ball enough that the soldier's own armour could protect them. At a very short range it would be ineffective, but you'd reduce the effective range of the enemy muskets somewhat and that's useful.
The problem is that it'd probably be too cumbersome for a field battle - no good having your neat iron shields if the enemy marches around your flanks and it takes several minutes to turn your own mantlet formation.
 

Shadowwolf

Banned
Thanks I was talking with some friends about strategies that could have turned several battles in the 19th century, mostly Napoleonic, but Crimean and American Civil War as well, and we were debating if such things would be viable on a battlefield..

Thanks again
 
You could just use steel, it's not like it was a magical lost art after the fall of Rome. Plate armor itself was a late medieval convention in general but metal armor was not.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Thanks I was talking with some friends about strategies that could have turned several battles in the 19th century, mostly Napoleonic, but Crimean and American Civil War as well, and we were debating if such things would be viable on a battlefield..

Thanks again
Frankly it's much easier than that to not merely turn battles but make them very, very one sided - rifle training!

But the same point causes problems with your mantlets - if we assume they're rifle proof, but still thin enough to be mobile, then they're going to be impossible to make artillery proof (and that was generally the big killer on battlefields during the days of the two-wheel smoothbore cannon) A cannonball hitting a mantlet is going to turn it into splinters and probably kill or seriously wound not just the man pushing it, but two or three more besides, while cannister shot or shrapnel shot is still going to get through regardless.


What you really need, to carry thick enough armour to protect someone from bullets at close range... is a tank.
Or possibly a Hussite war wagon, but the horses on those are pretty vulnerable and they're a defensive weapon anyway.
 
Thanks for the replies...

I was trying to think of ways that armor plate could be massed produced.

It can, but it's better to do that by forging cheapish iron into defined shapes, ideally using water-powered hammers and deskilled manufacturing labour. This gives you what was called 'munition plate', one-size-fits-nobody and prone to rust and break, but still better than nothing.


As to the mantelets, or mantlets as I have always seen it, I was wondering if they would work against muskets and such

You could build something that will stop a musket ball, at least at most practical ranges. Cast iron would not be my choice, though. Layering linen (ideally silk) and hardwood should give you a good base resistance. Put a layer of steel or forged iron over it to reduce ablation and you're in business.

Of course these wouldv not be very portable (neither would steel or iron ones). I would suggest palisades or (if you want a tech solution) sandbags as a field expedient. POstable prefabricated palisades were a thing, at least for Ivan IV
 
Would Iron manetlets be able to protect soldiers from mid-19th century guns?
Could an infantry line use a row of wheeled mantelets to protect them from enemy fire, while firing from gun-ports?

Probably, yes. They might be too slow to use on the offensive, but defending armies (e.g., Wellington at Waterloo, or whatever) could use them as makeshift barricades.

Though, if you're going to make iron (or layered fabric/wooden/iron) mantlets, could you make pavises of the same material thick enough to defend against musket fire and light enough to carry around? During the middle ages you had pavise/crossbow combinations, a pavise/musket combo would be interesting to see.
 
I was wondering.....

Would Cast Iron make good medieval armor?

I ask because I would imagine that it would be cheaper and quicker to make, but I am no expert on such things.

Also...

Would Iron mantlets (manetlets) be able to protect soldiers from mid-19th century guns?
Could an infantry line use a row of wheeled mantlets to protect them from enemy fire, while firing from gun-ports?

Thanks

Cast Iron is too brittle for Armor, a good whack with a mace would shatter your breastplate.

As for Iron Mantlets, by the mid 19th Century, we're in the age of the Minie Ball, so probably not. Maybe if you used steel instead. . .you'd still have to find some way to round the mantlet to deflect the bullet too. . .
 
Historically, handheld shields were never made wholly of metal or covered with much metal plating on the outside. That would make them too heavy and diminish their mobility. You often see shields with a metal bosse or with a metal hoop or frame to protect their edges, but they were predominantly made of wood and hardier cloth. About the only mostly-metal historical shields I can think of were the small types, for duelling or personal self-defence, such as the tiny buckler or the slightly larger targe.

I suppose partially iron-shielded or steel-shielded mantlets and pavises could work. However, these portable static shields need to be made of an extra-hard wood as the base, then have some additional padding attached on the front (maybe even just gambeson-style wool-in-thick-cloth padding), and on top of that, a thinner bit of hard-wooden shielding, with a thinner layer of iron or steel shielding attached. This setup could potentially thwart even 19th century guns, but just narrowly. Some of the better rifles later in the century would probably drill through even such multiple-layer portable shields.

Even if the materials are light, the mantlets or pavises will still be very heavy due to having the outside armoured coat, not to mention all the other (somewhat lighter) layers of armouring. Industrial era firearms saw a gradual, but firm increase in accuracy and muzzle velocities, and that is part of why we stopped using armour and shields made of traditional materials to counter cartridges. Simple metal armour isn't entirely ineffective against modern firearms, but it leaves a lot to be desired in terms of effectiveness. Part of why materials like kevlar were developed - strong and elastic enough to withstand a small amount of shots, but light enough to allow for a lot of active movement during combat.

Mail armour (i.e. the ring one, for mail shirts, etc.) is a very old concept, invented already during the late Iron Age. It survived in use since antiquity until at least the 18th century (in parts of the world). Early attempts at mail armour from the Iron Age were fairly unrefined, and many were made of simple iron, rather than steel. I suppose that would be your best bet for "iron armour". Beware though, mail armour didn't really take off before blacksmiths learned to make proper steel during antiquity.
 
Last edited:

Saphroneth

Banned
IOTL machine guns in WW1 often had little metal gun shields attached to them; does anybody know how effective those were?
The gunshield's purpose was pretty simple - prevent the gun crew from being sniped out from directly ahead (which was a major problem for artillery in the days of the rifle). They certainly prevented easy line of sight, and probably significantly slowed the bullet in question - but I'm not sure if they could completely protect against a high powered rifle bullet.
 
Top