| Author |
Message |
|
Michael Long
|
 Posted: Mon 16 Sep, 2019 4:24 pm Post subject: High Medieval mail - is 16 gauge wire thick enough? |
 |
|
As I'm looking around at mail suppliers online, it seems that they rarely use any wire thicker than 16 gauge. When flattened into a very thin ring, the greater diameter is usually 1.4-1.8mm, while the lesser diameter (thickness) is so small that it is rarely reported. And this is with internal diameter 8-9 mm.
Reading some of the older threads, I understand that the diameter and thickness of historical mail is difficult to measure, and that it varied greatly.
But I'll just pose the question anyway:
Do you ever think that the mass produced mail available nowadays uses an inner diameter and thickness of ring that is rather skimpy for a stand-along hauberk in the High Medieval period? It is hard to imagine some of this stuff stopping arrows, as the 12th Century knight relied upon it to do.
And if these commonly available rings are on the flimsy side, is there any recourse other than making your own rings or paying top dollar to one of the top craftsmen?
|
|
  |
 |
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Mon 16 Sep, 2019 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The thickness of the wire is the least of the problems with modern mail. A greater concern is how thinly the overlap is hammered.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arne G.
|
| Posted: Mon 16 Sep, 2019 4:39 pm Post subject: Re: High Medieval mail - is 16 gauge wire thick enough? |
|
|
| Michael Long wrote: | | And if these commonly available rings are on the flimsy side, is there any recourse other than making your own rings or paying top dollar to one of the top craftsmen? |
Sadly, no. Though it isn't all that hard to make decent rings on your own. Obviously, though, it is very time consuming, which is why if you want really good mail and have some coin to spend, you might want to look into some top craftsmen.
Besides Erik Schmid, who else is out there that does this sort of thing?
|
|
 |
|
|
Michael Long
|
| Posted: Mon 16 Sep, 2019 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | The thickness of the wire is the least of the problems with modern mail. A greater concern is how thinly the overlap is hammered. |
This would be a greater concern for weapons test, as opposed to appearance and weight, correct?
For the sake of speculation, what kind of dimensions would a 12th Century knight want for mail on his chest, right where the lance will hit?
We expect coifs and throat protection to be small internal diameter, but the chest is a large area. Would we see round rings of 2mm with internal diameter 6mm? Areas of 6:1 weave?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arne G.
|
| Posted: Mon 16 Sep, 2019 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Long wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | The thickness of the wire is the least of the problems with modern mail. A greater concern is how thinly the overlap is hammered. |
This would be a greater concern for weapons test, as opposed to appearance and weight, correct?
For the sake of speculation, what kind of dimensions would a 12th Century knight want for mail on his chest, right where the lance will hit?
We expect coifs and throat protection to be small internal diameter, but the chest is a large area. Would we see round rings of 2mm with internal diameter 6mm? Areas of 6:1 weave? |
6:1 is attested only for mail standards (collars). I will say that examination of extant hauberks shows that the centre chest appears to have the heaviest rings, but exact dimensions depend somewhat on the internal diameter of the rings. If you had a hauberk with, say ~1/4" I.D. rings, I'd make the center chest 16 ga. and (particularly back and arms) 18 ga. or maybe even a bit lighter.
Just spitballing, though. I'll let the better informed chime in with more precise info.
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Mon 16 Sep, 2019 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Long wrote: | | Dan Howard wrote: | | The thickness of the wire is the least of the problems with modern mail. A greater concern is how thinly the overlap is hammered. |
This would be a greater concern for weapons test, as opposed to appearance and weight, correct? |
Unfortunately no. The lapped section has been flattened too much, which makes the lapped section too large, which makes the links look like soda can ring pulls.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Wed 18 Sep, 2019 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IMO you can get a better-looking hauberk by making one out of alternating rows of solid and butted links. It looks far closer to the museum examples than any of the commercially-available riveted offerings (so long as you use small links - say 6 mm OD). You have to get pretty close to be able to tell that there aren't any rivets. The problem with this is, if you do any public demonstrations, you spend all of your time explaining that historical mail was riveted and not butted. Best compromise is to wear a butted/solid hauberk and keep a genuine patch of historical riveted mail to pass around. These pieces can be bought fairly cheaply from auction houses.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeton Osmani
|
| Posted: Thu 19 Sep, 2019 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hey Dan, can small or thick maille rings protect against heavy crossbows and lance strikes.
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Fri 20 Sep, 2019 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Mail Unchained article has eye-witness accounts of mail stopping mounted lances.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeton Osmani
|
| Posted: Fri 20 Sep, 2019 1:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
ok thanks
i have read the article (maybe not carefully)
but what about heavy crossbow attacks. i saw a video of a modern crossbow (i assume a historical heavy crossbow will do the the same thing) being able to penetrate maille armour, i even saw a video of a 140 or 160 pound longbow penetrate riveted maille at quite the distance?
but does the size or density of the rings affect the protective power of maille armour ?
sorry for the nit picky questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Long
|
| Posted: Fri 20 Sep, 2019 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeton Osmani wrote: | ok thanks
i have read the article (maybe not carefully)
but what about heavy crossbow attacks. i saw a video of a modern crossbow (i assume a historical heavy crossbow will do the the same thing) being able to penetrate maille armour, i even saw a video of a 140 or 160 pound longbow penetrate riveted maille at quite the distance?
but does the size or density of the rings affect the protective power of maille armour ?
sorry for the nit picky questions. |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c3W3ks7O9g
To my knowledge, no one has ever shot at high-quality handmade mail from an expert smith who has studied the historical techniques.
http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.19189.html
Internal diameter and thickness of the rings affects protection, of course. But in modern mass produced mail it is likely that the rivets are far too weak. No one is being attacked with thrusting weapons that require a strong rivet, after all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic