[Patrick Kelly]

Over the last two or three weeks I've been devoting most of my spare time to my mail hauberk. I really should be spending that time writing content, but this mail stuff has become something of an obssession. The more I get into this the more I realize what an involved process it really is/was.

So far I have added four 12" x 6" gores to the skirt. This added an additional 2 feet to the skirts circumference, and allows the skirt to move and hang more freely and properly. It also makes the hauberk far easier to put on and take off. I've also closed up the neck opening so it's smaller, and now biased forward as it should be. Finally, I spent this afternoon adding an 8" high, 4" wide, diamond shaped gore to the back of the hauberk that is centered between my shoulder blades. This eliminates any binding when I move my arms. Only the good Lord knows how many rings that is!

The final step is going to be to lengthen the skirt another 3 or 4 inches. Then I think it will be done. The other day I was having lunch with a friend who has an interest in things medieval(especially scotish stuff Mac!). He asked me if it was done. I replied "I don't know if it will ever really be done". There's also a mail coif that could be tweeked a bit.

This has been a very enlightening project for me and I've found that the approach to construction is basically the same as constructing a fabric garment, only you're using metal rings and those little gifts of the devil known as rivets. When I dealt with making butted mail the approach was essentially a matter of making a tube, then attaching shoulder straps and sleeves. Since I wanted to do this project as right as possible with these materials it's turned into something far more complex. I've learned a lot and I think it will be worth it in the end.

[Jonathon Janusz]

That learning experience is a great benefit to how I've been going about my maille making projects too. You can see, read, or hear about the finer points of making maille, but to actually go through the processes of tailoring a garment is invaluable in learning about the craft. I'm glad to hear your project is going so well.

One question, though. You said you added gores to the skirt to increase the overall diameter of the bottom hem of the shirt due to problems with the way it draped and moved. Could you elaborate? I've found that having a barrel for the torso equal in diamter to my largest measurement around plus about 10" (what seems to be a consensus among people who know more than me) gave me plenty of room without difficulties in movement in an early-period designed garment. I would like to get a better grasp on what problems you encountered. I am very seriously considering (some would call me off my rocker) rebuilding my shirt yet again to shorten it and more closely tailor it in a fashion for a later period interpretation (less 11th century and more late 14th to early 15th), and don't want to tailor myself into a corner, so to speak.

. . . and once I get this all sorted out, maille chauses are the next order of business . . . (madness, I tell you, madness)

[Jean Thibodeau]

Patrick;

Very interesting to read and all that custom tailoring should help a lot when you finally get a gambison as the extra looseness in the right places should make putting the maille on over the gambison a lot easier.

When a maille hauberk is generously oversized tailoring may not be as necessary but a tailored one should hang much better and I look forward to seeing pictures of what you are doing.

Are you taking progress shots as you gradually modify your hauberk ? Might make a worthwhile article for a feature ?

I bought the most generously sized hauberk I could find from Valentine Armoury that offers modifications like extra wide, extra long and other options like long or short sleeves.

Even with the maximum size available wearing it over a gambison is rather snug, I can deal with the binding around the shoulders if I blouse the hauberk above a tight belt: Otherwise raising the arms over my head tugs a lot just under the armpit.

I don't think I would want to invest the time it would take to do the modifications you are doing and the learning curve to be able to do it well: But I do find your posts on this most interesting.

[Michael P Smith]

[Patrick Kelly]

Jonathon,

Michael answered your question pretty well. Adding an extra 10" to the overall diameter would fix the problem but it would also add quite a bit of unnecessary weight. In this photo you can see how the bottom of the skirt hangs at an angle.

Adding the gores to the skirt allows for more room and flexibility, something that is a must when you have a big fat posterior like mine. This also allows the skirt to hang evenly and prevents the split from opening out to such an exagerated v-shape. (that last part has always been a real pet peeve of mine in most modern mail garments) The split is also longer now, and the hauberk will probably be 3-4 inches longer when I'm done. The extra width is very obvious when squatting, walking, sitting, etc. To remove it I can now cross my arms, grab the hauberk by the skirt and pull it up past my shoulders while standing. Then I simply bend at the waist and it falls right off. It was a bit more of a struggle before.

[Patrick Kelly]

Jean,

Unfortunately no, I haven't been taking photos. It's such a long drawn out pain in my a$$ to drag all of the equipment out to take good photos that I rarely do it off the cuff. That's one of the reasons why I've been thinking that I need to build a shop in the back yard. It would be nice to have dedicated space for these projects. I've also found that it's hard to get good shots of mail unless you're using a model or a manequin of some sort, otherwise it's hard to describe what you're doing and you wind up with "here's a flat piece of mail".

I have been thinking of doing an article on the arming of a 21st century knight, a "norman on a budget" kind of thing. If you don't include the sword I doubt if I have more than $1000.00 in the entire kit thus far. (that's excluding the axe and the spear also) I don't know if I'll pursue that, but it's a thought.

[Chuck Russell]

you know patrick, common believe that normans do not have a seperate coif. its all intigrated. hehehe now you have more projects to do

[Jonathon Janusz]

Michael, thanks for the replies. I think I was typing before thinking again. The detail I forgot to mention is that my torso diameter is roughly my largest diameter plus 10" with the maille at full stretch. If I were to tighten it up any more, the rings would lay pretty wide open and I start running into some binding issues (I've built it up to the present diameter, starting small, to keep the ring count down as much as I can). Numbers 2 and 3, check.

As for Number 1. . . I've rebuilt the sleeve and shoulder sections more times than I care to remember and am still tweaking it for fit. Currently, I've got the sleeves set slightly forward to ease the back, the neck hole slightly biased forward, and am currently playing with sleeve diameter and where the armpit seam should sit to minimize binding there.

Yeah, I've been thinking haubergeon. I was thinking that with the wider short sleeves I might look at plate for the lower arms and elbows, tucking the armor under the maille and over the gambeson (I know this is not as common as the alternative, but I was thinking about going for a "light infantry/auxilliary/poor man's rank-and-file soldier" kind of feel - debating whether to bother with a breastplate at all, maybe just the maille shirt as the primary defense. Of course, this would change my plans entirely for the legs. . . and add a different helmet. . .

Patrick, I know what you mean about the horseman's split. One of the more unique solutions I've heard for the problem is to put four gores not into the body of the skirt but at the four ends of the spits - creating trapezoidal shapes where rectangles used to be and in doing so "close up" the slits. The picture and added description helped clear up your thoughts. Doing the integrated coif would be very cool, but take your time and think it through if you're going to go after it - I've got the luxury of being able to easily disassemble and reassemble; I could probably hear you from Wisconsin if you had to take a mess apart at the shoulders a couple of times. . . or at least more than once. . .

[Patrick Kelly]

[Jean Thibodeau]

Patrick;

Integral coif: I would think that fit would be really critical and that the " comfort " issue tricky if the face opening is too small for the coif to be pushed back over the head to lie behind the neck. With a small face opening the only way to cool the head for a few minutes relief, if overheated, would be to remove the entire hauberk.

Historically I wonder if the coif was designed to allow this uncovering through the face opening of either a separate coif or an integral one. ( Maybe both types of design for both types of coif are historically valid ? )

A coif made to cover as much of the face as possible would have a face opening too small to permit this.

So is wearing the coif open and pulled back over the head something that was really done or am I just being influenced by " Hollywood " armour imagery again ?

Oh, the maille square / bib, that is now viewed as being a protection for the face when tied in place, would and could serve as a double layer of mail reinforcement if tied down in it's over the chest position: So maybe the old argument about is it a bib or a square of extra protection on the chest could be answered as: Both right! Instead of the usual conclusion that the older interpretation is wrong Oh, and the square would only make sense with an integral coif. A separate coif would use a flap of some sort I guess to perform the same function ?

[Dan Howard]

Except that there doesn't appear to be any instances of the bib being down when actually engaging in combat. It is always up protecting the face.

Here is a separate coif dating to 1100AD so not all Norman coifs were integral.

[Jean Thibodeau]

Thanks Dan about the bib usually covering the face in battle. But I could see being caught by supprise with the bib in the down position and probably not tied down, as no proof seems to exist that it ever was tied down. ( Just speculation on my part. )

Even if not it's function it would still give you a double thickness of maille.

A separate coif with a generous mantle does give you this double layer over the shoulders, upper back and chest.

What is my point here ? Well not so much anything I want to prove just observations of maybe the obvious.

( Stating the obvious: An unfortunate vice of mine that Patrick has pointed out before. )

[Michael P Smith]

[Michael P Smith]

[Chuck Russell]

[Jeremy V. Krause]

I'm sorry guys but what are you talking about with this "bib"?

I have seen the bordered square section of mail over the chest on the hauberk and I have seen the chin-flap part of the integral coif covering pulled over and fastened on the other side of the coif at the cheek to temple area but I am not sure I know what you are talking about with this "bib" pulled up over the face. Any pics would be helpful. Even an explanation would be cool.

Jeremy

[Chuck Russell]

ya the bib is the square over teh chest, and the face covering. well it could be THAT is the question.

http://home.armourarchive.org/members/flonzy/...ans-03.jpg

a bad picture to show but the guy with the face covering... when untied it makes a square on his chest.

there are some that believe that it is a square of over mail that gives double protection. since the normans used calvery this would make since in the sence that more to protect teh chest when clashing with spears. the arguements could go on and on and on ehhehe and i'd have to go look up in one of my 40+ books on normans for sources ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ehhehehe the humanity!!!!!!!! hheeheh[/url]

[Jeremy V. Krause]

Hmmm. . . I see this is kind of a pain in the a#$ isn't it?

I have always assumed it was just an extral covering of mail. There are so man illuminations that show hauberks without this being drawn up. In any case all of the square sections I have seen both on bayeaux and in D. Edge "the Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight" show it bordered with a different color which must be cloth decoration. How does this work into the bib over the fave theory- I don't know.

Needless to say I have a significant interest in this as I am only ofcussing my current A&A collecting interest in the era 1050-1175 when this question is more critical. I do believe the the seperate coif tends to become more popular 1075+
Jeremy

[Chuck Russell]

[Dan Howard]