6in1 pattern. Ahistorical?

Nate B. · Post by **Nate B.** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:10 pm

Fragments of maille found at Tiefenau (near Bern, in Switzerland) were of the 6-in-1 construction. The rings were about 1 cm diameter and a little over 1.2 mm wire thickness. The find is a "massenfund" or hoard deposit dating from the 2nd--to 1st centuries BC. The find is Celtic/Gallic.

I am having trouble finding the source which has an actual photo, or it would be posted.

N

Theo Koutz · Post by **Theo Koutz** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 1:50 pm

Neat! I'd be happy with a textual source, but pictures would be great.

EDIT: found link. Wish I knew more German.

http://www.vindeliker-kohorte.de/panzer.htm

Erik D. Schmid · Post by **Erik D. Schmid** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:32 pm

Fantastic! Thanks for the link.

Nate B. · Post by **Nate B.** » Sat Sep 16, 2006 7:30 pm

Theo Koutz wrote:Neat! I'd be happy with a textual source, but pictures would be great.

EDIT: found link. Wish I knew more German.

http://www.vindeliker-kohorte.de/panzer.htm

Yep, that is the pic I was looking for. I was trying to find the 86 Muller article but it's buried and I didn't want to just post line drawings from the 1990 book of his. That article on the Ciumesti find pretty much rocks as well, for describing the maille.

nathan · Post by **nathan** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:14 am

(since we have tangented anyway there is no harm in doing so further)

Ernst wrote: John France, "Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades 1000-1300", Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1999 ISBN 0801436710

p.18 Â¶ " ed... while in his account of the fight between Richard of England and William of Barres, the poet Guillaume le Breton refers to the "thrice-woven hauberk" of the combatants."

Ernst thanks for providing those sources.

Just one observation about the word thrice. It's archaic definition is extremely or greatly (not necessarily 3 times as it tends to be in everyday usage).

I have no idea what language these texts were written in (I would presume Latin), are we not in serious danger relying on a tertiary translation in this case? Does anyone have access to the original untranslated text?

N.

Ernst · Post by **Ernst** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:45 am

Ernst wrote: p. 248 Note 9 "The song of Roland tr. D.L. Sayers (London: Penguin, 1957), p. 90, v. 79, v. 99, p.101; Guillaume le Breton, Phillippidos, vol. iii, pp. 83-85, ll. 485-534; ...... The point about the "thrice-woven mail" in Guillaume le Breton has been missed because of the odd Latin, thoraca trilicem, but the substantive here is of Greek origin and the adjective agrees.

While the language and wording in the 'Roland' is not specified (presuming the translation was not relying on multiple copies), thoraca trilicem is the specific wording used by Guillaume le Breton. I don't believe thrice means anything more than 'three times' in this instance.

gplant · Post by **gplant** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:44 pm

Erik D. Schmid wrote:
And it *is* common knowledge that a mail clad knight would generally have at least two layers of mail on his shoulders, as is evident from such things as extended coifs, Roman shoulder doublings, and others.
Common knowledge for who? Not all soldiers who fought in mail would be wearing two layers of mail over the shoulders. The Roman shoulder doubling was not used by all soldiers. The Norse did not have two layers. Coifs generally did not extend past the shoulders.

I apologize for misleading anyone here about the commonality of â€œdoubled mail.â€

Konstantin the Red · Post by **Konstantin the Red** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:52 pm

Watching with great interest...

What Glenn pointed out about its density and weave making for reduced flexibility makes E6-1 just the thing for a standard-of-mail, like the RA's (once British Museum's) E6-1 specimen.

Erik D. Schmid · Post by **Erik D. Schmid** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:34 pm

As such, I am simply stating that a full E6-1 hauberk is of little practical use. My conclusion then is that references to double mail must refer to something else.

In your eyes maybe, but it was used.

The mail pieces listed above prove that as well as there being extant shirts made like this with short sleeves. I feel it was a very specialized piece and did not see widespread use among all soldiers due to price among other things.

Glen K · Post by **Glen K** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:32 pm

I wonder what the likelyhood would have been of, for example, a hauberk with 6-in-1 body and 4-in-1 sleeves, coif, etc. ?

Erik D. Schmid · Post by **Erik D. Schmid** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:54 pm

I think it would have been quite possible Glen. Dan can add more, but this could be what has been referred to as a jousting hauberk.

RandallMoffett · Post by **RandallMoffett** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 12:38 am

Could 4 in 1 and 6 in 1 have been used together. A segment of 6 in 1 at the chest or soemthign with 4 in 1 elsewhere?

Seems to be possible. I made mail mittens with 6 in 1 backs and fingers and cuff of 4 in1, worked fine.

RPM

Dan Howard · Post by **Dan Howard** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:19 am

Perhaps those more familiar with jousting could comment. It seems to me that mail that is less flexible than 4-in-1 might not be a problem in this environment. As Russ said, it might even be desirable.

Erik D. Schmid · Post by **Erik D. Schmid** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:48 am

My thoughts are that it would be a section on the front. How big is open to debate. These I suspect were pieces made from alternating rows of riveted and solid links.

It would seem that 6-1 was the last use of butted mail before the switch to riveted. 4-1 to start with, some 6-1 later, and finally we have riveted. It makes sense. Just like the use of 8-2 for aventails until solid gorgets came about. The 6-1 standard in the British Museum I suspect did not exist in a vacuum either.

gplant · Post by **gplant** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 2:52 pm

Glen K wrote:I wonder what the likelyhood would have been of, for example, a hauberk with 6-in-1 body and 4-in-1 sleeves, coif, etc. ?

You make a good point, one I fully support.

I regularly will incorporate some E6-1 into my E4-1 hauberks. My favorite place is around the neck. I have also done gloves with combinations of the two, with the E6-1 on the back of the hand. I also enjoy making vests of E6-1 that fit close around the torso.

The difficulty comes when one is dealing with a part of the hauberk that protects a part of the body that has to move. I tried E6-1 sleeves on a hauberk, and discovered it to be a total failure after completing the first elbow length sleeve. The mail refused to flex, and greatly inhibited my ability to move my arm. Worse, the mail refused to collapse on itself, resulting in uncomfortable wrinkles of mail rubbing against my bicep and torso. After wearing it around some I gave up and removed the sleeve entirely.

Not to be put off I tried again with an E8-1 hauberk (larger ring diameter). I aimed for really short sleeves this time. Once again the sleeves proved unyielding, and completely prevented me from moving my arms more than a few degrees. In the end I cut off the bottom half of the sleeves, and had to cut a slit in the hauberk from the armpit almost to the neck in order to allow my arms to move. Without the slit the chafing was unbearable.

I encountered a similar problem when it came to bending at the waist. So long as the bottom of the hauberk ended above my belt, I was fine. But once it extended past my belt, I could no longer bend properly at the waist. Imagine a tight fitting lamellar suit that extended down past the hips without any change in the pattern. Sitting became impossible, and I looked more like I was in a back brace than anything else.

In the end all of my E6-1 type hauberks have ended up being only vests. Not that I was unable to do more, but I found that more meant uncomfortable in the extreme.

Now it is possible to incorporate E6-1 into an E4-1 hauberk in places. It is even possible to do so in the torso, with certain sacrifices.
1. You must sacrifice â€œone size fits most.â€

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:32 pm

Makes me wonder, given the number of mail shirts in Eastern Europe under Turco-Persian influence with front slits and obvious strapping/lacing/buckles... once upon a time I recall seeing a shirt in that style that looked like it had dramatically more open links right across the waist/belt line, and then got denser again below.

Some accomodatory measure?

Ernst · Post by **Ernst** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:43 am

nathan wrote:
I have no idea what language these texts were written in (I would presume Latin), are we not in serious danger relying on a tertiary translation in this case? Does anyone have access to the original untranslated text?

N.

Nathan,

You asked a good critical question, which is the kind of thing which keeps old men up at night.

While I responded (hopefully not too harshly) in regards to John France's very distinct documentation for "thrice woven" mail in the Latin text of Guillaume, the question remains if his inclusion of the Roland passages is relevant.

Although I don't have a copy of Dorothy Sayers translation with me, it is generally regarded as a faithful work. If you are desperate, you should be able to do the work on the Oxford Roland from home.
http://image.ox.ac.uk/show?collection=b ... msdigby23b

Then again, typed copy of the original language is already available.
http://www.fh-augsburg.de/~harsch/galli ... _ch02.html

The specific laisses referred to by France are listed as v.79 and v. 99. Only v.79 actually refers to some sort of tripled mail, while both verses 79 and 99 mention a doubling. (My poor attempt at translation appears in parenthesis.)

L. LXXIX (ll.994-999)
Paien s'adubent osbercs sarazineis,
(They put on 'Saracenois' hauberks)
Tuit li plusur en sunt (saraguzeis) dublez en treis,
(This is the true line in question. Should this be "doubled in three?")
Lacent lor elmes mult bons sarraguzeis,
(Thouroghly laced their good Saragossan? helms)
Ceignent espees de l'acer vianeis;
(Gird on their Viennese steel swords)
Escuz unt gens espiez valentineis,
(their shields and their Valencian? spears)
E gunfannuns blancs e blois e vermeilz.
(and gonfannons of white, blue, and red.)

Verse XCIX (ll.1283-4)
L'escut li freint desuz l'oree bucle,
(Something or other about a shield with a golden boss)
De sun osberc li derumpit les dubles,
(There we go with that "double" hauberk reference...)

What seems interesting to me is the fact that these doubled or tripled hauberks are worn by the Saracens, or are in the Saracen manner or style. Perhaps Erik will provide more information on this, but until very recently, 6:1 was known to be a style used among the Turks or Persians, the question was if it ever was used in Europe.

An older, more poetic translation than Sayers is also available online, so you can see how those more skilled in Old French have read these passages.
http://omacl.org/Roland/r1-87.html

Thanks for the great question, Nathan. It's always best to look to the primary source, although it may raise more questions than it answers.

Mart

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:59 am

Gawd my OF is rusty... wasn't THAT good to start with. Yeah, doubled in three is how I'd read it, too. Don't get where "thoroughly" comes from in line three, though. But I don't have a dictionary handy, and haven't mucked with it since the abortive Wiliam Marshall affair, so your guess is as good as mine here.

Ernst · Post by **Ernst** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:19 am

Russ Mitchell wrote:Gawd my OF is rusty... wasn't THAT good to start with. Yeah, doubled in three is how I'd read it, too. Don't get where "thoroughly" comes from in line three, though.

Nor do I.

It was late, and I was trying to think of some wording stronger than "tied", since "laced" no longer seems to carry the feel of "tied with a knot" for me. But you are correct, and I am not capable of doing a word-for-word proper translation. The version relied upon by John France is still available for $10 dollars or less in paperback, and is probably required reading for many liberal arts students. I'm not sure which pile of books my little copy of the Roland is under at the moment....

I think it's important to realize that many supporting artifacts are documents, rather than surviving armor.

Ernst · Post by **Ernst** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:23 am

For what it's worth, I found the Sayers translation, added in parenthises.

L. LXXIX (ll.994-999)
Paien s'adubent osbercs sarazineis,
(Now are the Paynims in Sarsen hauberks dight) N.B. Great, now we have to translate "dight".
Tuit li plusur en sunt (saraguzeis) dublez en treis,
(Wherof the most with triple mail are lined; )
Lacent lor elmes mult bons sarraguzeis,
Good Saragossa helms they lace on tight,)
Ceignent espees de l'acer vianeis;
(Swords of Viana steel gird on their thighs; ) N.B. Viana is in modern Portugal, while Vienna and Innsbrook in Austria have a long reputation for quality steel.
Escuz unt gens espiez valentineis,
Spears of Valence they have, and shields full fine,)
E gunfannuns blancs e blois e vermeilz.
(Their gonfalons are scarlet, blue, and white.)

Verse XCIX (ll.1283-4)
L'escut li freint desuz l'oree bucle,
(Under the boss of gold he cleaves the shield,)
De sun osberc li derumpit les dubles,
(And of the hauberk the double mail unseams)

I'm not certain the "doubled in three" reference refers to 6:1, though it might. It might also refer to a jasserant, with the mail folded (doubled) between layers of fabric.

Perhaps a native French speaker might be able to help out in the connotation of this unusual phrase?

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:17 am

Glen K wrote:I wonder what the likelyhood would have been of, for example, a hauberk with 6-in-1 body and 4-in-1 sleeves, coif, etc. ?

It would be possible - six/one can go into four/one seamlessly if you work at it
sx: a panel of 6/1 made of 14 gauge 1/2 inch rings goes into a 4/1 piece of 14 gauge made with 3/8 in rings perfectly. I have several old shirts floating around the SCA somewhere with reinforced chest panels done that way

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:24 am

gplant wrote:
Glen K wrote:I wonder what the likelyhood would have been of, for example, a hauberk with 6-in-1 body and 4-in-1 sleeves, coif, etc. ?
You make a good point, one I fully support.

.............................
The difficulty comes when one is dealing with a part of the hauberk that protects a part of the body that has to move. I tried E6-1 sleeves on a hauberk, and discovered it to be a total failure after completing the first elbow length sleeve. The mail refused to flex, and greatly inhibited my ability to move my arm. Worse, the mail refused to collapse on itself, resulting in uncomfortable wrinkles of mail rubbing against my bicep and torso. After wearing it around some I gave up and removed the sleeve entirely.

Not to be put off I tried again with an E8-1 hauberk (larger ring diameter). I aimed for really short sleeves this time. Once again the sleeves proved unyielding, and completely prevented me from moving my arms more than a few degrees. In the end I cut off the bottom half of the sleeves, and had to cut a slit in the hauberk from the armpit almost to the neck in order to allow my arms to move. Without the slit the chafing was unbearable.
................................
Glenn

Dropping to a lighter diameter wire, while keeping the ring size & weave constant will increase the flexibility tremendously

Felix Wang · Post by **Felix Wang** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:49 pm

"Ceignent espees de l'acer vianeis;
(Swords of Viana steel gird on their thighs; ) N.B. Viana is in modern Portugal, while Vienna and Innsbrook in Austria have a long reputation for quality steel. "

Just to confuse things, there is a Vienne in France - on the Rhone, part of the old kingdom of Provence, which has been there since Roman times.

gplant · Post by **gplant** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:30 pm

Dropping to a lighter diameter wire, while keeping the ring size & weave constant will increase the flexibility tremendously

Not really. The very nature of E6-1 is that regardless of the gage, the weave itself is what makes the mail stiff. Also, if one reduces the gage without reducing the diameter, alternating rows of mail in the hauberk will slide back and forth. It makes for a very sloppy looking mail.

Glenn

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:15 am

As you will - I've built stiff 4:1 and fairly flexible 6:1 by varying wire diameter

Dan Howard · Post by **Dan Howard** » Fri Sep 29, 2006 4:28 pm

mordreth wrote:As you will - I've built stiff 4:1 and fairly flexible 6:1 by varying wire diameter

Me too. I have 6-in-1 in my hand now that moves just as easily as any 4-in-1 I've made. I also have a 4-in-1 collar that is completely rigid.