Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > What would break first: sword or mail? Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2 
Author Message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,354

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 3:27 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I don't know how his test piece was quilted but I'm guessing it was more like a bed cover than a jack. Martial quilting tends to be dense; the end result is fairly rigid. A 30-layer jack can stop a lot more than 80J from an arrow.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Stephen Curtin




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

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,190

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 3:58 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
I don't know how his test piece was quilted but I'm guessing it was more like a bed cover than a jack. Martial quilting tends to be dense; the end result is fairly rigid. A 30-layer jack can stop a lot more than 80J from an arrow.


I don't doubt that a 30 layer jack was a very effective piece of armour. As I said I haven't read The Knight and the Blast Furnace, so I could be misrepresenting the data. Even if the jack was not as densely quilted as a stand alone textile armour should be (and so not as stiff), it would still be too thick to simulate an arming garment.

Éirinn go Brách
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,354

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 5:28 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Agreed. Arming garments were not much thicker than a sweater. IMO the mail would have been just as resistant if it were layered over a much lighter garment.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Stephen Curtin




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

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,190

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 6:24 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Agreed. Arming garments were not much thicker than a sweater. IMO the mail would have been just as resistant if it were layered over a much lighter garment.


Pity that wasn't tested though.

Éirinn go Brách
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mart Shearer




Location: Jackson, MS, USA
Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posts: 1,290

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 10:04 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Mail is pretty easy to cut if you rest it against a rigid surface.


Which makes it difficult to explain why they would wear cervellieres beneath mail coifs, or plates beneath their hauberks.



 Attachment: 91.91 KB
Morgan M.638 fo010v-grgt.jpg


ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
View user's profile Send private message
Jeffrey Faulk




Location: Georgia
Joined: 01 Jan 2011

Posts: 578

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 12:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mart Shearer wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
Mail is pretty easy to cut if you rest it against a rigid surface.


Which makes it difficult to explain why they would wear cervellieres beneath mail coifs, or plates beneath their hauberks.


Well... if they were available, did not add significantly to the weight or impair movement, and increased protection... why not?

Plus, while they may not have been aware of the fact that rigid protection distributes force differently from soft protection like mail and fabric, they wouldn't have been unaware of the empirical results. Say your fellow-knight takes a mace blow to the head without flinching due to wearing a cervelliere underneath his mail hood, while another knight without one is outright killed despite wearing mail. It doesn't take much to figure that out!

Additionally: You can probably cut through mail if you put it on top of a two-by-four on a stump, sure. But cutting through mail that someone else is wearing, while trying NOT to get cut, and simultaneously trying to cut YOU in return... is probably quite another story, rigid protection underneath that mail or not. That's probably what Dan meant, would be my guess.
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,354

PostPosted: Sun 07 Aug, 2016 6:21 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mart Shearer wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
Mail is pretty easy to cut if you rest it against a rigid surface.


Which makes it difficult to explain why they would wear cervellieres beneath mail coifs, or plates beneath their hauberks.

The primary threat was from spears and arrows, not swords.

Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > What would break first: sword or mail?
Page 2 of 2 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2 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 2003-2019 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum