The Age of Maille: Cutting-Dominant Swords Only?

[James Brazas]

The Age of Maille in Western Europe seems to definitely be dominated by cutting-oriented swords like the Falchion, Oakeshott Type XII arming sword, Oakeshott Type XIIa longsword/war-sword, etc.

You get some cut-and-thrusters like the XVI and XVIa towards the end of the Age of Maille and maybe even some early Type XV and XVa, but by and large, the Age of Maille seems to have been an age of cutting weapons - even despite the fact that thrusters like the XV would have been highly effective in the thrust against maille-clad enemies.

That leads me to two questions:

1. Was the cut really that effective against maille?
After all, cutting-oriented straight, double-edged blades were the predominant sword type from the Late Roman Empire's Spatha to the War-Swords of the 13th and early 14th Century.

2. How much of a cutter does a sword really have to be in order to be effective in the cut against maille?
Obviously, the Type XII worked well.
But how about cut-and-thrust blades like the XVI, XVIa, XVIII, and XVIIIb?
Would there be any real value in a cut from a Type XV or XVa against maille?

Basically, what I'm curious about in that second question is at what point does a blade lose the necessary cutting power to the point that it is essentially restricted to thrusting-only in order to deliver any appreciable harm to a maille-clad enemy?

From what I understand, a good, direct-hit cut from a Type XII can break bones through the maille and possibly split flesh. Is that correct? What would be a reasonable expectation for the other Oakeshott types?

And this isn't just a mental exercise either. Type XVI and XVIa were definitely used in an era when maille was still in common use. Some historians even say the Type XV and XVa developed as early as the late 13th Century - long before the rise of Full Plate.

[Corey Roberts]

So being that you have posted this a while ago and have yet to get any kind of response, I will just respond shortly and say that I've read it and have been mulling it over and will get back to you soon.

[James Brazas]

OK, thanks! I look forward to your response.

[Ryan Snavely]

Heres a video I had in a favorites folder about that. I believe that also wore something along with the maille armor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl-ec6Ub7FM

Cutting swords would probably be more effective against maille since thrusting swords would run the risk of getting your sword's tip caught in the rings.

[James Brazas]

Well, it's true you do run the risk of getting your sword caught in the maille with a thrust.

Yet I'm pretty sure you could get it out with a good kick. It looked like they were being very gentle when removing the blade so that they could tell how deeply it went in.

Then there's the fact that all of the thrusts they showed which actually got the blade stuck were clearly fatal. It only takes a few inches of penetration anywhere in the torso to kill. So I'm pretty sure most of the thrusts from the Type XVa longsword would have been fatal - maybe even some of the thrusts from the Type XVIa as well.

Actually, I'm kinda disappointed that they didn't give say how many inches the swords penetrated in the more effective thrusts. They only mentioned it for the weaker thrusts. Plus, they didn't specify whether that was how much it penetrated the armor or the meat. 2.4" of penetration into human flesh could very well kill.

So I can definitely see the risk of getting your blade stuck as a potential problem, but not likely the main reason to prefer a cutting-oriented blade.

And yes, it did look like there was something underneath the maille but over the meat. I couldn't quite tell what it was. Normally, knights back then would have worn a gambeson or arming jacket underneath - but that's mere textile armor designed mostly to absorb shock and make the armor more comfortable. I really couldn't tell what they had under the maille in that video. It looked rubbery. I'm not sure how that would affect the test thrusting.