Effectiveness of Mail armor

[JeanryChandler]

I'm working on another follow up article on realism, and I'm somewhat stumped by my research on armor. I am especially disapointed by the still very contradictory information available on the effectiveness of mail armor. I don't own and can't yet afford any mail to test on (or I would!) so I was wondering if those of you who have done test cutting on real mail, could tell me some more about it.

From the best I understand well made riveted mail will resist strong cuts and thrusts, as well as arrows, but will be penetrated by very close-range arrows, javelins, heavy axes, military picks, and two handed pole arms. I also understand (perhaps incorrectly?), that a properly wielded long sword with a suitible "armor piercing" edge (of the type made in the Renaissance) will cut through mail with a hard cut.

How far off am I? Can mail be easily pierced by a single-sword for example? Some accounts I read seem to indicate that it's almost impossible to cut through. Shark-proof chainmail seems incredibly resistent to the kind of slashing cuts a sharks teeth made, but I have no idea if that is similar to medieval mail or not, and I know sharks teeth are not steel.

Also, has any test cutting been done by ARMA on Lamellar, Scale, Cuir Bolli, or Brigantine armor?

Any help on this would be vastly appreciated, and the sooner the better as I'm behind deadline!

Jeanry

[John_Clements]

We/ve been preparing an artil on this very subject for over a year. It will appear eventually. There is historical evidence that "cuts" both ways, but there is also a lot of misinformation on maile. The bottom line is there were varieties of mail and just as with anything else, different swords and different strikes will produce different results on them.

JC

[Guest]

I am making some myself, butted, european 4 in 1, and it is very very good at protecting cuts, and can do some good protecting from thrusts, but when thrusts happen some of the point does go through, but it isn't a full blow

[Shane Smith]

Hi Kirk,

I must say that I have personally done a bit of testing against butted maille and in my experience, it is of dubious worth against both the cut and the thrust when well struck.Butted maille often rips open like a zipper when a blade bites into it or a crossguard gets hung on it.As for the thrust,the rings simply spread when the point passes which does VERY little to stop the blow.Butted maille "MAY" stop the first cut or two but it will be in shambles in short order based on my own experience here locally.

Welcome to the forum <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Brian Hunt]

The other problem I have commonly seen with butted mail is the tendency for it to develp holes from it's own weight while wearing it, so it starts to look like the dreaded mail moths have gotten hold of it. <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Brian Hunt.

[Casper Bradak]

Yeah, butted mail is ahistorical and worthless as real body armour. In my opinion only good for show and conditioning. Unfortunately since it's no longer on the military market even the more available and affordable riveted mail, what there is of it, still sucks compared to the original stuff, but at least it's an attempt at real armour.

[Shane Smith]

It seems to me that I've heard somewhere that butted maille was used by middle easterners centuries ago though I can't recall where I heard that.On this,I could be wrong <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/crazy.gif" alt="" />

[Casper Bradak]

I've heard the same thing on some other forums, but I've never seen anyone able to produce the evidence. I'd be suprised if it existed anywhere, as it's not sound protection, and back then when it took that much more work and money to produce, would be far less economically sound when it falls apart and you haven't even fought in it yet. If the links were heavy enough to provide some protection when butted, the entire armour would be more hinderance than help.

[Derek Wassom]

There was a shop near where I lived in Switzerland that sold military antiques (mostly bayonets and the like), but they had two 19th century Persian "Kulah Khuds", and both had butted mail aventails.

[JeanryChandler]

I agree rivited mail is far, far superior and butted mail is mostly a modern convention, but butted mail was apparently used historically

http://www.armourarchive.org/essays/essay__maille_timetable.shtml

[Casper Bradak]

Maybe it's just me, but I'm still not convinced. I guarantee all that 2000 year old mail wasn't stored in an armoury, and from what I've seen corrosion keeps even 700 year old excavated mail from being identifiable in the manner the links were joined.
I've seen 19th century mail from europe as well as the middle east butted, and it was made only for display. It was probably souvenir material, or even ceremonial from the east at that time, hence its only being butted.
Then there are of course possible fakes, and just repros made for museums.
I could be wrong though.

[Matthew_Anderson]

Interesting, but with no documentation or source information, I would hardly consider that little table as evidence of the use of butted maille. Although I have heard of some examples of butted mail in Asian pieces, I have never seen any real evidence of butted maille used in Europe as armor. All the extent pieces from the period when this type of armour was actually used are made of riveted and/or solid rings, the latter being forge welded or punched from sheets of metal. My own experience in using various types of reproduction maille armour shows that for butted maille to be strong enough to be a practical defensive garment, it must be made of very large diameter wire, such as 14g. This makes the armour very heavy, with a long sleeve hauberk weighing as much as 40lbs. for instance (depending on ring size). The same armour made of flattened, riveted rings by contrast, would weigh less than 20 lbs. and would be be much more durable.

[Erik D. Schmid]

Jeanry, There really have been no modern tests done that can accurately portray what mail armour was capable of. There have been a few demostrations performed by both ARMA and others, but unfortunately they fall short due to the test piece not being highly accurate.

Many period accounts seem to show that mail was an adequate defense. However, you do have to be careful when using accounts like these as they often times tend to be somewhat biased, or may have been added to in order to make the story more enjoyable.

Caspar, I hope you are not referring to the mail I make. <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Butted mail was highly used in the Middle East/India for centuries. Mostly as parade and ceremonial dress rather than for actual combat. It was also used for the tourist market during the Victorian era. The combat mail for these areas was made of riveted and whole links.

That mail timeline on the Armour Archive is very misleading. I wish it would be taken down. The information presented there comes from very old books and such that were written by people who really did not know that much about the subject.

Actually Casper, many of the early pieces of mail that are more or less fused lumps offer a great deal of information on how the links were joined. You just have to know what to look for. I have been asked to examine a couple of Roman/Celtic shirts found in England when I am over there next week. They both have some very interesting details that have never been published before that may send a few shockwaves through the Roman reenactment community.

All in all mail was a decent defense when used properly. As far as we can tell all the mail made in Europe for combat was made of riveted links or a combination of riveted and whole links. Of course the size of the links varied as did the shape. Flattened links closed with wedge rivets start coming into the picture around the 13th/14th centuries somewhere around Germany. Prior to that you have round section links being closed with a round rivet used in conjunction with somewhat square section whole links that were made by either welding or punching. The use of round links and round rivets continued into the 15th century alongside the flattened links. Eventually the round section links start being closed with wedge rivets too.

[Shane Smith]

Erik,
Thanks for the informative input on this subject.Can you cite a few of your sources that support the ceremonial use of butted maille theory.I find that very interesting though not unexpected.Thanks

Welcome to the forum <img src="http://www.thearma.org/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Matthew_Anderson]

Erik,

Thanks for weighing in, I can't think of anyone more qualified to address the subject at hand. I agree that it's difficult to be sure if tests of reproduction armour are meanigful or not, it's just so hard to replicate the armour accurately and I haven't yet found anyone willing to wear it and let me whack them with a sharp weapon :^) BTW, do you still have a website? IIRC, you had quite a lot of good research info about period maille at one time.

-Matt A.