Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Haubergeon in 1100-1250 Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2  Next 
Author Message
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Sat 06 Mar, 2010 3:21 am    Post subject: Haubergeon in 1100-1250         Reply with quote

Hi all. I am looking for evidence of haubergeons with half or three-quarter sleeves in the period 1100-1250.

The problem is this: I am planning two kits. One kit will be a knight hospitaliers kit somewhere between 1100-1250. Our group hasn't picked a date yet but this is where we are looking at for the moment. I also want a late 14th century kit because, well, they're just awesome Big Grin And there's a lot of 14th century re-enactment going on in The Netherlands and Belgium.

I am not idependently wealthy (yet!) so I want to be able to re-use as many parts of kit as I can between these two.

I am thinking about getting a haubergeon with half or three-quarter sleeves that comes down to mid-thigh or slightly lower. Flat rings riveted with round/domed rivets. That should be fine for my 14th century kit under a coat-of-plates or a corrazina. I asked one of the more knowledgeable members of out Hospitaliers group if I could get away with such armour in the earlier Hospitaliers era and he thinks it's okay, but I am having trouble backing this up.

I went through the entire morgan bible looking for images of people with such haubergons. I have found five plates that show this. Three of them are archers but two show soldiers wielding a mace and spear of some sort.

Is there any more evidence about such haubergeons in the age of mail? Do you think I can get away with having one haubergeon for both kits? Riveted mail is expensive so I really want to buy just one. Also, if there is more evidence of shorter sleeves, what else did people wear in the age of mail? Leather vambraces or just a long-sleeved gambeson? And what did they use for hand protection?

Thanks in advance! Below are the plates I found in the Morgan bible.



 Attachment: 173.7 KB
morgan-2.jpg
Soldier with mace center-right

 Attachment: 208.54 KB
morgan-3.jpg
Soldier with pike in center

 Attachment: 183.86 KB
Crossbow archer bottom right [ Download ]

 Attachment: 192.93 KB
Archer top-center [ Download ]

 Attachment: 181.53 KB
Archer in the center [ Download ]
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Stephen Curtin




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

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,153

PostPosted: Sat 06 Mar, 2010 8:55 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hi Sander, first off I'll just say that I'm no expert on the subject but as far as I know the type of mail shirt your looking for should be fine for your period but I'm not sure you would find half or three quarter length sleeves on a knight hospitaller, perhaps you should try being a sergeant or squire (I know doesn't sound as glamorous as a knight).

As far as other protection for the lower arms goes, I think your only option here is a long sleeved aketon under your mail shirt, as there is no evidence for leather or any other arm protection at this time.

Éirinn go Brách
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nathan Beal





Joined: 02 Apr 2006

Posts: 68

PostPosted: Sat 06 Mar, 2010 7:29 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sander

See if you can find a translation of the rule of the templars (J. M. Upton-Ward), i think this mentions the use of 'unsleeved' mail being given to sergeants, but don't have my copy to hand to check.

I would certainly believe this is a reasonable possibility, in fact the primary issue with such a shirt might be the fact that the coif is not integral with it, this really does seem to be the way this was arranged, a coif worn under the main shirt can look similar (and the surcoat can be constructed to help hide the layering). An additional though lesser consideration it is unsplit (as an aid to riding) as a split does still seem to be common practice into the 1200's. A surcoat will of course go a fair way to hiding this as well.

As to forearm protection i have always gone with a full sleeved aketon/gambeson/wambais underneath, if you are making this item yourself it is not difficult to increase the padding on the outer forearm (especially if layered) on your weapon side to help against rebated weapon hits (even working some leather in under the facing if you want).

HTH
N.

Beware of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
View user's profile Send private message
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 2:26 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Stephen Curtin wrote:
perhaps you should try being a sergeant or squire (I know doesn't sound as glamorous as a knight).


A brother-sergant or brother-at-arms would be just fine for me. No need to be a knight. I got my terms mixed up. The collective group is of course called "The Hospitalliers" and not "The Knights Hostpitalliers".

@Nathan: Good tips on the coif, thanks. I was indeed hoping to hide the exact length of the haubergeon under the surcoat. I didn't give thought to the split though. Is it uncommon to have a split in a mid to late 14th century haubergeon?

Also, any idea what they used as hand defense when the mail was not full sleeves? Separate mail gloves? Or just leather gloves? The Morgan bible plates only show bare hands but I really need some kind of hand protection when sparring in rebated steel.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 3:37 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I found two more interesting effegies that apparently show knights with three-quarter sleeved hauberks.

This is Reginald, King of Man from 1229. He appears to be wearing some kind of gloves or gauntlets. Any idea what they are?

This is Geoffroi de Masviez from 1231. He has shorter sleeves and bare hands.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Stephen Curtin




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

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,153

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 6:45 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Your right Sander that first effegy is interesting. It does seem to be some form of gauntlet but all I'll say about that is that it doesn't seem to be a common feature at this time. Orders like the Hospitallers and Templars had strict codes as to what they were allowed to wear both on and off the battlefield, so I don't see something like this gauntlet being issued as general issue, as I said above this does not seem to be a common feature at the time.
Éirinn go Brách
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Luka Borscak




Location: Croatia
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Likes: 7 pages

Posts: 2,229

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 3:04 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Wouldn't full sleeved hauberk be easier to justify in late 14th century kit than 3/4 sleeved hauberk in 12th or 13th century?
View user's profile Send private message
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 3:24 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luka Borscak wrote:
Wouldn't full sleeved hauberk be easier to justify in late 14th century kit than 3/4 sleeved hauberk in 12th or 13th century?


Perhaps, I don't know for sure. I guess historically it's no more uncommon than a haubergeon in the 12th century. There's two things I worry about when wearing a full hauberk in 14th century kit. One is weight. 14th century kits are pretty heavy because you're wearing nearly full plate on top of nearly full mail. Hauberks are heavier than haubergeons. I'm not a very big/strong guy (yet Wink) so I'd like to keep the weight down.

The second issue I see is with the vambraces. Can you fit a gambeson sleeve and a hauberk sleeve inside a steel vambrace? Most of the pictures I have seen so far of people in 14th century kits either use no mail underneath, use voiders or use a haubergeon where the mail sleeve goes over the rebrace and ends near the elbow. I haven't seen anyone try to fit a mail sleeve inside the vambrace. Would it fit?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Michael Zander





Joined: 25 Nov 2009

Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 4:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Plenty of effigies from 1350-1400 show mail on the inside of the elbow, implying at least 3/4 sleeves that slip under the vambrace to some extent.
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Thibodeau




Location: Montreal,Quebec,Canada
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Likes: 50 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 5
Posts: 8,172

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 4:52 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sander Marechal wrote:
Luka Borscak wrote:
Wouldn't full sleeved hauberk be easier to justify in late 14th century kit than 3/4 sleeved hauberk in 12th or 13th century?


Perhaps, I don't know for sure. I guess historically it's no more uncommon than a haubergeon in the 12th century. There's two things I worry about when wearing a full hauberk in 14th century kit. One is weight. 14th century kits are pretty heavy because you're wearing nearly full plate on top of nearly full mail. Hauberks are heavier than haubergeons. I'm not a very big/strong guy (yet Wink) so I'd like to keep the weight down.

The second issue I see is with the vambraces. Can you fit a gambeson sleeve and a hauberk sleeve inside a steel vambrace? Most of the pictures I have seen so far of people in 14th century kits either use no mail underneath, use voiders or use a haubergeon where the mail sleeve goes over the rebrace and ends near the elbow. I haven't seen anyone try to fit a mail sleeve inside the vambrace. Would it fit?


1) Weight of maille hauberk can vary with ring size and thickness of the wire used and a hauberk meant to be used as the primary defence might be heavier than maille meant to be worn under plate defences.

Many historical maille seems to me to be made up of smaller rings than many modern reproductions that are very heavy in comparison: In part this is because making a large hauberk out of very small rings would be much more expensive using period riveted maille. I have a stainless steel welded maille haubergeon with 3/4 sleeves that reaches mid thigh that only weights 8 pounds: These are machine made so using very small rings is not more time consuming to make and thus not more costly than the more usual riveted maille. ( Obviously not historically correct if this is a priority for you ).

http://theringlord.com/cart/shopdisplayproduc...8542224329

2) I have worn a full sleeved maille hauberk with gambison with plate arm vambraces with no problem. I think as long as the vambraces are big enough and the gambison not too bulky it work quite well.

The vambraces would stay in place very well because of the tightness and compressibility of the gambison.

Depending on the armour type a combination of straps and or pointing should keep the armour firmly where it's supposed to be.

You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
View user's profile Send private message
Sam Gordon Campbell




Location: Australia.
Joined: 16 Nov 2008

Posts: 677

PostPosted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 6:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I agree with the above comments. A maille of such a length was being used from what I can recall, into the early 14th century, and slowly but surely being augmented with plates or perhaps even splinted armour and hardened leather.
And though the Mackjoskiiblarg Bible has lots of intergrated coifs, I've seen a few manuscript illuminations where it seems as though those who are not knights have a seperate coif with and odd square shape to them.
And methink these fellows are right when they say that, if push comes to shove, putting the coif under the haburgeon and then popping on a surcoat/tabard would be fine.
As for hand protection, I'd say either make a "double maille" mitten/muffler or somthing, or a really heavilt padded glove, or a sneaky gaunlet made to look like just a leather glove.
But yeah, I'm a fan of this period as well! Laughing Out Loud

Member of Australia's Stoccata School of Defence since 2008.
Host of Crash Course HEMA.
Founder of The Van Dieman's Land Stage Gladiators.
View user's profile Send private message
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 3:21 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean Thibodeau wrote:

Many historical maille seems to me to be made up of smaller rings than many modern reproductions that are very heavy in comparison: In part this is because making a large hauberk out of very small rings would be much more expensive using period riveted maille.


How does 8mm internal diameter sound? I was looking at Ulfberth mail. For example:

Flat rings, round rivets, mixed solid/riveted rings:
http://www.battlemerchant.com/Chain-Mail/Flat...::395.html

Flat rings, wedge rivets. All riveted:
http://www.battlemerchant.com/Chain-Mail/Flat...:1702.html

The Mail: Unchained article puts wedge-riveted mail in Germany between the 13th and 16th century. So I assume both types of hauberk would be appropriate.

Quote:
I have worn a full sleeved maille hauberk with gambison with plate arm vambraces with no problem. I think as long as the vambraces are big enough and the gambison not too bulky it work quite well.


I do intend to get a gambeson that's not too thick.

Quote:
Depending on the armour type a combination of straps and or pointing should keep the armour firmly where it's supposed to be.


I haven't quite figured out yet how to point everything. I saw some nice photo sequences on how to arm/point a 14th century kit but they skip the mail. I guess arms can simply be pointed to the gambeson through the mail at the shoulders with tabs? Then strap the buckles over the arms of the hauberk.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Thom R.




Location: Tucson
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Reading list: 30 books

Posts: 630

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 7:22 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

If you are handy with pliers and you wanted both styles you could make yourself sleeves with a mufflers of mail for the lower arms and hands that matches your hauberk and then get a small pile of matching butted rings, darkening if necessary, and stitch/unstitch the sleeves to/from the hauberk with the butted rings as needed. would take about 30 minutes each time to change it out. Thats what I do and not only does it pass the 10 foot rule, it passes the 1 foot rule. Most people can not tell the seam of butted rings from the riverted ones unless they are really examining it up close. but then again we argue about this a lot. I have a few seams of butted mail in places on my riveted hauberk in order to fit it to my body. some people think that is not OK for hysterical accuracy Big Grin but I would counter that these loose prom-dress hauberks are not historical either. most of the illustrations that survive show that some effort was made to fit the mail especially on the arms and lower torso and if you wear and fight in mail for any length of time you'll realize the advantage of properly fitted armour whether mail or plate.

On pointing mail, are you asking about voiders or skirt? I don't point my hauberk, like I said I fit it and see no reason for pointing. I do use some narrow tie garters on my mail on my legs and sometimes on my wrist. tr
View user's profile Send private message
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 8:04 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thom R. wrote:
On pointing mail, are you asking about voiders or skirt?


Neither. It's about pointing plate arm defences, specifically the spaulders. I'm assuming that the pointing thread goes from the gambeson, through the hauberk to the leather tab on the top of the spaulder?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Jean Thibodeau




Location: Montreal,Quebec,Canada
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Likes: 50 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 5
Posts: 8,172

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 8:38 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sander Marechal wrote:
Jean Thibodeau wrote:

Many historical maille seems to me to be made up of smaller rings than many modern reproductions that are very heavy in comparison: In part this is because making a large hauberk out of very small rings would be much more expensive using period riveted maille.


How does 8mm internal diameter sound? I was looking at Ulfberth mail. For example:


Quote:
I have worn a full sleeved maille hauberk with gambison with plate arm vambraces with no problem. I think as long as the vambraces are big enough and the gambison not too bulky it work quite well.


I do intend to get a gambeson that's not too thick.

Quote:
Depending on the armour type a combination of straps and or pointing should keep the armour firmly where it's supposed to be.


I haven't quite figured out yet how to point everything. I saw some nice photo sequences on how to arm/point a 14th century kit but they skip the mail. I guess arms can simply be pointed to the gambeson through the mail at the shoulders with tabs? Then strap the buckles over the arms of the hauberk.


( Edited to avoid clutter read the full original post ).

First I'm not an expert on period maille or have practical experience with the maille shown in the links, so I will give you some very general comments ( opinion ).

8 mm or 9 mm seems to be " popular " with modern makers: This doesn't mean that this size wasn't used historically but a lot of the historical mail is made up of smaller rings. 6 mm rings are also available and might be a better choice.

The Ring Lord maille I mentioned has rings of 3.8 mm in diameter using wire diameter of .6 mm, this mail is not historical in materials and welded maille in period I think existed but was rare and probably very expensive. Maille in this size range seems to have been used though.

As to pointing and straps: For costume use one can be " sloppy " i.e. armour secure enough to walk around in and not have it shift and become uncomfortable. For real fighting, or in period, any loose armour is a liability should the fighting turn into wrestling in armour as one wouldn't want to make it easy to twist or pull on the armour i.e. for example, arms attached to a gorget but not well secured could be moved aggressively out of position to seriously discomfort the wearer.

People here who actually use their armour for very active fighting or jousting should chime in about " the art " of wearingpointing armour for serious work ! Wink

You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
View user's profile Send private message
Thom R.




Location: Tucson
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Reading list: 30 books

Posts: 630

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 10:18 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Ah. You can point from the underlying arming garment through the mail to the spaulder but it is a pain to thread through, especially the shoulders which carry the brunt of the weight of the hauberk. brass or metal chapes on the end of the points help. the mail will cut and abrade the cord or leather. I used to do it that way but now for my transitional harness I have a coat of plates over mail and I point the shoulders to the COP. for my 15th c kit, I use voiders so the shoulders point to the gambeson. Note that the Churburg harness does not have upper arms. can't wait to see your kit!
View user's profile Send private message
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 3:16 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean Thibodeau wrote:
8 mm or 9 mm seems to be " popular " with modern makers: This doesn't mean that this size wasn't used historically but a lot of the historical mail is made up of smaller rings. 6 mm rings are also available and might be a better choice.


I looked at the 6mm rings that they have but I don't have a hauberk in my size. For some reason their "roman maille" as they call it, only comes in L and XL. Also, I must say that I prefer the look of all flat rings. The roman mail is flat solid rings with round riveted rings.

Do you happen to know of any sources of historic ring sizes? The Mail: Unchained article is surprisingly sparse on details. I looked up some of the pieces posted in that article on the website of the Cleveland Museum of Art. They list the diameter for some of the pieces as 11mm. The Met doesn't list ring diameters that I could find.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Sander Marechal




Location: The Netherlands
Joined: 04 Dec 2009
Reading list: 17 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 671

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 3:26 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thom R. wrote:
I used to do it that way but now for my transitional harness I have a coat of plates over mail and I point the shoulders to the COP.


Good point. I do intend to have a corrazina so I could point to that. So that means I'd need to make the corrazina before I get the arms.

Quote:
can't wait to see your kit!


That may take a while Happy I haven't bought anything yet except for leather gloves for WMA practice. Perhaps I'm a bit obsessive compulsive about it but I am planning the entire kits before buying anything. But a haubergeon or hauberk is definitely one of the first things I buy. With a gambeson, hauberk and a simple kettle hat I'll be able to do a man-at-arms from the 11th century to the 15th century Big Grin
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Thom R.




Location: Tucson
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Reading list: 30 books

Posts: 630

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 3:59 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

You have a great plan. You're correct though in that wrapping a vambrace around mail is -------- probably not the most comfortable nor accurate thing for a late 14th c kit , yet for 13th c or earlier, a full hauberk is really necessary. so you have the quandary over sleeve length and how to make a flexible kit. the rapid changes in armour in the 14th c make it difficult to have a very flexible kit for multiple periods.

you can point shoulders through mail. it helps to have stiff chapes on the cord in order to poke through the mail and really helps if you have a squire available to do it for you Big Grin honestly it can be a bit tricky to do it yourself if the mail is in any way close to historical in total weight. for the right shoulder you grab the mail with you right hand and haul it up while trying to get your left fingers in underneath and grab the points and poke them through. vice versa for other side.

you can tie latigo leather lace or hemp cord directly to the mail and use that to tie down the top of your shoulders. also some people strap their shoulders to a gorget too. then the whole assembly lays over the mail. I don't know if either method is period or not but I have seen both done a fair amount in the SCA. but in both cases, as Jean stated, those methods tend to result in a looser fit. tr
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Thibodeau




Location: Montreal,Quebec,Canada
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Likes: 50 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 5
Posts: 8,172

PostPosted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 7:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sander Marechal wrote:

Do you happen to know of any sources of historic ring sizes? The Mail: Unchained article is surprisingly sparse on details. I looked up some of the pieces posted in that article on the website of the Cleveland Museum of Art. They list the diameter for some of the pieces as 11mm. The Met doesn't list ring diameters that I could find.


Can't say that I know of a source giving the range of the sizes of rings used in maille.

I would also assume that different time periods and places might have preferences for larger or smaller ring sizes.

The very small ring sizes I would imagine would be more expensive just because of the numbers of rings used in a maille shirt will go up fast the smaller the ring sizes.

If more costly due to the amount of time and work needed to make a very fine small ring maille shirt I think these would tend to be very expensive and high quality since there would be no point in putting this much effort in making such a shirt and not using the best materials and workmanship. Small ring size, proportionally large diameter wire would also be the strongest maille.

Since there was little standardization in manufacture I would also think that one would find every ring size that had practical uses as opposed to finding exact sizes matching modern made maille: Each maker of wire would have his own unique gauge of wire ? But I'm just guessing here, it quite possible that the makers of wire guilds of some major armour making centres had some sort of " standard " about gauge of wire and/or quality of materials ?

We need a maille expert here to tell us what is known and what we just don't know about maille sizes and the making of maille from wire to finished product.

You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Haubergeon in 1100-1250
Page 1 of 2 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2  Next 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