Answers to Mail Questions from Myths Thread...

[Erik D. Schmid]

I posted this as a new topic so as not to turn attention away from the topic of the other thread. The tests Bob is referring to took place at Robert MacPherson's shop last Tuesday. The non-scientific tests were to show how well armour worked against certain weapons.

First, we took one of Mac's great helms and beat the living shit out of it with a warhammer. It was interesting to note that the spike end of the hammer needed to hit perfectly in order to cause damage. If not it simply skidded off imparting very little energy to the target. The pronged side of it had an entirely different effect. When this side of the weapon made contact it transferred almost all of its energy to the target leaving you with a dead feeling in your arm.

Now, this type of helm would normally be worn over a smaller bascinet with an attached aventail. The bascinet would have had padding underneath it. A soild hit would have rung the bell of the person being struck, but it is highly possible they would not have been mortally wounded. These tests were also done so as to give the weapon the advantage over the armour. In spite of this the armour performed exceptionally well.

With the testosterone running high, we then decided to attack mail. We used a piece of Steve's variety and a piece of mine. Mine being a copy of a common German variety. (Bob, the mail we used in the tests was a copy of the mail shirt A2 and not the standard A9. You may have gotten the two confused as I showed you the small sample of the mantle links I am making for the copy of A9 that I am working on). They were placed one at a time over a wooden post with no padding and shot with both a 150lb. & 300lb. x-bow. The 300lb. bow was a small version, but the 150lb. one was full size. Both were employed at point blank range and both failed to penetrate either piece of mail. The bolts had field point type heads.

The next day we decided to perform a stabbing test with a rondel dagger. This time the mail was backed by padding. Several very forceful downward blows were given to the mail. Mine performed better due to the smaller link diameter. Steve's allowed to the point to penetrate slightly further. However, in each case the mail was not compromised. The human body would give more than the surface the mail was placed on which would seem to suggest that it would have performed even better.

Now, please realize that this was only a test against a very specific type of mail. There were many different varities and each wouild perform slightly different under the same conditions. For example the mail from a sixteenth century sleeve would not have faired as well simple because the links were made of much finer wire. In any event there are an infinite number of variables to consider when performing tests of this type. However, in spite of the shortcomings of these tests, I feel it would be safe to conclude that armour worked quite well.

Had the x-bows been of much higher poundage and been equipped with bodkin tipped bolts of the long skinny variety, they may have been more effective. Then however, as Bob stated you have to take into account the padding worn in conjunction with the mail, but that's an entirely different can of worms best left for another day.

About spears Bran, I was involved in a test some years ago where we tested some mail against a falchion and an English bill. The falchion was useless, but the spiked bill managed to open up a link. The mail used in that test was not as accurate as that used in this one, so you can draw your own conclusions as to how effective the newer stuff would have been.

In this picture you can see the effect that the x-bows and the dagger had on the mail.

[img]http://www.erikdschmid.com/test.jpg[/img]

As for the standard in the British Museum it does indeed have a collar woven in the 6-1 pattern. Judging by the style of links used in the collar I would place it in the sixteenth century. This is the only piece of 6-1 European mail that I know of. One possible explanation for using this weave is that it is far easier and less time consuming than to make one of smaller links woven in the 4-1 pattern thereby making this style much more cost effective.

Here is a picture of the collar area:

[img]http://www.erikdschmid.com/standard.jpg[/img]

[James B.]

Wow thanks Erik! I have always wanted someone to do tests with your maille and Mac's armor.

Also thanks for the info on collars from a while back, I started one last week and hope to finish it in the next few weeks and post images.

[Madyn]

Erik,

Thanks for sharing the details of the tests. Good stuff.

[Josh W]

I know mail is your thing, Erik, but is there anything you could tell us about the English-Style backplate that Bob said was tested against the crossbows, too?

[Erik D. Schmid]

Of course I can Josh. The backplate wasn't actually tested against the x-bows. Mac only shot it for fun. The armour is being made from high carbon steel. It had not yet been heat treated when it was shot. I am unsure of the thickness, but it looked to be about one to one and a half millimeters. In the following pictures you can see the results.

[img]http://www.erikdschmid.com/backplate.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.erikdschmid.com/dent.jpg[/img]

[Hugo T.]

Sorry to derail from the subject of the thread, but this crossbow looks amazingly sweet! Hard to believe this small thing pushes at 300lbs!

Hugo

[Erik D. Schmid]

I couldn't believe it either until I tried to pull the string back by hand. That little bastard is more than meets the eye. Looks can definately be deceiving.

[Tom Knighton]

Erik,

Thanks for the response! I found it interesting how well the maille stood up to the piercings that were attempted, since I had always heard that maille was vulnerable to the thrusting attack. I guess this goes to show how well the armour DID work.

Thanks!

Bran

[Cet]

Really interesting tests ( I've got to go and read the thread this spun off from) Do you have any data on the hardness of the plate armour you tested the various weapons against?

[Otto von Teich]

Wow, I'm impressed. I would have thought the 300 lb crossbow at point blank would have pierced the mail for sure,And I would have thought a good chance for peretration on the backplate with a good square hit at the right angle. You guys make good armour, good armour woiks! l see where different mail would behave differently.As would plate. the quality and hardness varied on the old stuff. You must have done a fine job setting the rivets on the mail. Thanks for sharing....otto

[Magmaforge]

I have two things to say; firstly, good job. Secondly, please do this test again, and do it as a scientific research project that can be presented in the MAIL research journal!!!

[Erik D. Schmid]

Cet,

Unfortunately I do not have any data regarding the hardnesss of the plate. All I know is that it had not been hardened by quenching yet and was still in its raw form.

Magma,

Some day we do plan to do more thorough tests like this for inclusion in the journal. For now these have to do. I would like to take this line of thought one step further. Alan Williams' new book The Knight and the Blast Furnace has a section about mail and some tests done to it. Please take it with a grain of salt. The tests were performed on mail of substandard quality several years ago. I should know because I made the samples. Even the tests performed on the 15th century sample are questionable.

Last fall I posted a thread on several forums pertaining to the protective qualities of mail. You can find it here. Alan Williams in conjunction with Mike Loades is going to write a paper on the information gathered. The information that will be about mail will contain some flaws. For one thing the mail tested was not accurate for the time period. The tests were very impromptu. I was asked to make two pieces of mail for this television program, which by the way will air this fall. Please don't watch it. One of the pieces was to simulate a Viking style and the other a fifteenth century piece. I made the decision as to what kind to make as they had no clue. I also did not know that they were going to be used like this.

Unfortunately this information and that from the Alan's book are going to be taken as gospel for a long time to come. That is until we do some serious testing ourselves where we are not being rushed by some television people. Anyway....

On a lighter note, we may be publishing the research currently being conducted on the helmet of St. Vaclav (Wenceslaus) as well as the information regarding his hauberk in next years journal. I have been in contact with the people in Prague and they seem quite interested in using our journal to get the information out to people.

As for this years journal, we have a good list of articles that will appeal to just about everyone, including you plate people. It will feature a full colour glossy section in the middle for the pictures. Stunning to say the least.

[Madyn]

Erik,

When it comes to the armor vs. weapon debate, it seems like there are two polarized camps: those that believe images like those in the Maciejowski are accurate depictions, and men in armor were cut to ribbons as often as not; those that believe that armor was proof against everything except cannon balls and meteorites. I'm sure a lot of people fall somewhere in the middle, but whenever the argument comes up those two extremes pitch camp and slug it out.

I would love to read or see an exhaustive study, if such a thing were possible (I'm sure most of us would). Given the long evolution or armor and weapons, and the necessary time/money resources it would take to conduct such a broad study, this might be a dream. Maybe you can get a grant! Failing that though, please continue to post your findings, whenever and wherever.

I would love to see a study that put mail and/or plate against the full spectrum of weapons--swords (sabre/broad/two-handed. . . ), warhammers, poll axes, different arrows, different bolts from a wide range of crossbows, axes, maces, spears, pikes, ballista bolts, the whole shebang. That would rock

So, if you happen to conduct any further testing along any of these lines, don't hesitate to post your research. You have a very interested audience.

[Brian W. Rainey]

Wow, I'm impressed. I would have thought the 300 lb crossbow at point blank would have pierced the mail for sure,And I would have thought a good chance for peretration on the backplate with a good square hit at the right angle. You guys make good armour, good armour works! l see where different mail would behave differently.As would plate. the quality and hardness varied on the old stuff. You must have done a fine job setting the rivets on the mail. Thanks for sharing....otto

The testing was a bit skewed, actually. I would not use this as a point reference to document superior armour construction.

The mail was hung against cloth/leather glove and a solid piece of wood (4x4, I believe). Not even remotely similar to the density/consitency of padding and human flesh. The bolt was blunted, further denying penetration into the backing material. Mail, as a defence, would be used to deny contact to the flesh of hacks/slashes as well as minimize penetration of thrusts/arrows. Adequate penetration was not allowed in this instance to judge whether the mail would have held up soffuciently.

My opinion of this test is that the backing material absorbed the majority of the force, kicking back the projectile. This did not allow for sufficient penetration to test whether or not the mail rings would have broken or sheared.

A much more accurate test would be to hang a properly fitted mail shirt backed with sufficient padding on a person. Then shoot the person with period bolt/arrow tips fired from a period crossbow/bow. Unfortunately, I have problems finding volunteers for this test. Not sure why.

[Morgan]

Why not just hang the mail over a pad on a pig carcass?

[Brian W. Rainey]

Why not just hang the mail over a pad on a pig carcass?

Excellent idea!

However, you are taking all the fun out of it. A pig carcass does not scream in agony during the testing. Nor does it run around.. simulating a moving target.

Erik... perhaps more accurate testing is in order the next time we get together. It would be very interesting to see an ACCURATE test of mail.

[James B.]

Instead of a pig what about a jell person they use for forensics? The myth buster guys used one for doing the meat and ice bullet myths.

[Russ Mitchell]

Generally realistic give under the target should be sufficient. Calculating wounds with edged weapons by means of gel just ain't going to work, and a carcass used for the purpose would have to be quite fresh (goat, btw -- much better human-body equiv than pig)... okay for missiles, but in terms of whcih bone breaks, or which tendon is cut.. makes a dramatic difference between "this pisses me off and I'm going to eat you now" and "I want your butt but am no longer able to lift my arm."

[Erik Schmidt]

This might be of interest to the topic. Second picture from the top.

http://www.berwelf.de/realien/maerk_mus ... affen.html

It shows what is said to be a late 14th, early 15th century helmet fragment with, apart from other damage, a hole made by a a crossbow bolt ("Einschußloch eines Armbrustbolzens"). It can be clearly seen in the photo.

Erik