Assuming of course I mean the feet and hands, body and head is gonna be robe and hood/circlet most likely.

Depends if you're powerful enough to afford less physical armour.

Until you get your Alteration to 30, I would wear armor. Once you get the first perk of Mage Armor the AR will be better than light at that point.

Robes or clothes for a 'pure' mage, they add magical bonuses so why wouldn't you want to wear them?

Enchanted robes to wear and an enchanted mages staff to carry.

If using weapons then bound as they are weightless so require very little stamina.

Im backwards and Im sure theres others that are like me. I start out wearing the robes for the regeneration and cost reduction. Then later as my enchanting gets to 100, I usually switch to light armor. Dont know why, just do. Probably for the looks.

Well, Oakfleash is available right from the start, and even though I'm not a mage build, I still use it on my warrior character occasionally, using it as an energy shield or something like that

So you're talking only abour boots and gauntlets?

Traditionally, pure mages don't wear armor. I have a sneaking suspicion this mindset is a result of years of playing games with class restrictions, like D&D - in a game like Skyrim you really can't logically explain why leather boots (AR 0) are okay and leather boots (AR 5) aren't. It's not like you suddenly turn into a battlemage if you wear the latter.

I used leather boots and gauntlets because they looked good on my character. I didn't care about armor rating, I had my summons and Alteration spells to take care of any damage I might receive, they just fit my character's style. He still was a pure mage and never lifted a weapon, not even a bound one. His only blade was a hunting knife he used to skin animals. Of course I had to pass on the Mage Armor perk, but hey, you can live without it.

If you want to be most effective though, stick to clothes and take Mage Armor.

I thought the flesh spells only work if you're not wearing armor? I could be wrong and if I am, someone please correct me.

No, but there is a perk that does something when you aren't wearing armor. I believe it allows flesh spells to give more AR, but I forget.

Mage armor?

It makes flesh spells stronger. The spells work with armor, but the perk doesn't.

doesn't "pure mage" mean no armor at all?

To some it does but I let my mage wear fur boots and gauntlets because they look nice and warm. No helmet or cuirass though; they look too military for a mage IMHO.

I guess mage's can wear anything depending on what kind of mage we're talking about. Pure mages wear robes/clothing while battlemages wear heavy armor.

A pure mage never wears armor.

Why?

I think traditionally speaking mages always wear clothes/robes. But being that theres all kinds of different mages, it really doesnt matter.

They did away with classes but a "mage" class in TES used to mean no weapons and armor, only magic and maybe staves...a "battlemage" is more along the lines of an armored mage

Exactly, think of Gandalf...

Pure mage = robes / clothes

Battle mage = armor

To me a Battlemage just means a mage in armor hence the name.

Spellsword is a warrior crossed with a mage.

What kind of magic schools would a spellword use? Or does it really matter?

Pure mages would only use robes and other accessories, I remember in Oblivion that they were hampered by armor because it decreased their magical potency, and that there were several boots/ gloves that could be useful to mages.

But now they can wear light armor without any side effects unless you are using the Mage Armor perk, which is much more useful for Mages than wearing armor.

I would say robes, for roleplay reasons.

It doesn't really matter in Skyrim but I always refer back to Oblivion classes when thinking of what styles for a class even though I don't fully adhere to them and there's a few skills that have changed. Check here: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Classes

Spellsword magic schools should be Alteration, Destruction, Illusion and Restoration