I'm thinking about buying a chain maille shirt when I can afford it. The one I'm considering is $100 butted or $150 riveted. Is it worth spending $50 more for the riveted maille?
While I'm at it, have you found chain maille anywhere that's even cheaper?
I know folks have had some issues with this company when it comes to other items, but a friend of mine ordered this and he got it with no problem. Must be a surplus issue.
I'd still call them before ordering.
http://www.realarmorofgod.com/store/html/Products/Armor/Medieval-Armor/Chainmail-Shirt-115.html
It really depends on what you use it for. If you are looking for a more historically accurate maille, butted maille is not the way maille was made and it offers no real protection when compared to the riveted. If you just want it as a costume, I would say the butted is fine. In my opinion, if it is decent maille, for a small increase in price, why not get the riveted so that you have the option of actually using it or allowing someone else to use it in the future for more than just show? Also, I think riveted maille is a little more impressive looking too.
Okay, thanks.
Warrior Monk, I saw that, but it weighs 27 pounds, so I don't think I'd want to wear it for long. The one I'm looking at is this http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/generic/9080/ which weighs 12 pounds (it's made of anodized aluminum).
I did not realize weight was an issue. There are some folks out there that knit clothing that looks like mail (faux mail?).
Or: http://www.buycostumes.com/Valiant-Knight-Adult-Costume/17267/ProductDetail.aspx
I'm not really sure what 27 pounds feels like to wear around all day.
The knitted mail is interesting, but I'd rather have it made of metal. :) Thank you for the links, though.
The full weight mild steel or zinc coated steel weighing in at 27-30 lbs takes its toll. I wear two different types of riveted maille with a Viking persona and a Templar persona. I do not think you will be comfortable in the heavier version all day. I wear a very heavy gambeson under my Templar maille to distribute the weight properly, and I am still soar after a full day in it. I only wear two Kyrtle's under my viking zinc plated hauberk and it is heavy as hell. I usually do not even get that soar carrying a 70 lb pack on trails all day. Our bodies are just not broken in for wearing armor for extended times any more. Now knowing that your going with aluminum maille, I would just get the cheaper maille and move on. If it is just a costume anyways, it doesn't really matter.
Quote from: Manwariel on December 10, 2008, 01:17:59 PM
I'm not really sure what 27 pounds feels like to wear around all day.
The knitted mail is interesting, but I'd rather have it made of metal. :) Thank you for the links, though.
Go aluminum riveted! Trust me on that!
Thank you both for the input. :)
Quote from: Manwariel on December 08, 2008, 02:41:52 PM
I'm thinking about buying a chain maille shirt when I can afford it. The one I'm considering is $100 butted or $150 riveted. Is it worth spending $50 more for the riveted maille?
Absolutely. If you decide on butted maile I can just about guarantee your going to eventually wish you spent the extra $50 and purchased riveted. For your purpose, coolness & comfort factor I strongly recommend the aluminum riveted.
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i231/LittleCasino/twocents.gif)
M'lady,
Having worn a variety of body armor both professionally and recreationally, I can assure you that the 27 lb weight of a mail shirt would wear differently, than that of a 27 lb book bag, that most of your age encounter in their studies at school.
The mail shirt is worn around the body, and the actual weight pulls down on one's shoulders as it rides the body above your center of gravity. A book bag or backpack pulls back on one's shoulders because it technically rides behind your center of gravity.
As I mentioned, when I was an Infantryman, we encouraged our lads to wear their packs high on the back above the center of gravity to decrease the physical strain, and make it more comfortable for wearing over long periods.
The bottom line is it's up to you. Riveted aluminum would probably be in your best interest, for what it sounds like your looking for. Butted rings of any material have the tendency to separate during various periods of activities.
Best wishes, and Deus vult!
Thank you, sir. I think I will go with the riveted aluminum when I can afford it.
Now i know i'm dredgeing up a very deceased horse (or thread if you prefer) but butted mail worked and still works GREAT. The overwhelming majority of maille from the twelth to the fifteenth century was butted maille and about fifty fifty in the sixteenth and was still frequently used throughout. Now considering how valuable wire was it pays to consider, why was so much chainmaile made butted when the amount of work to add a rivet was trivial compared to forging and rolling steel for wire? butted would take the majority of blows that riveted would and come out virtually with the same damage, the only large variance in strength was small diameter and peircing blows, such as arrows. I can provide some examples not nearly definitive but i cant find anything online to source better YouTube - Machinwelded maille cut battleax (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At0fQc33biI&feature=channel) And also 9:20 through on dealiest warrior of this episode they do tests on BUTTED chainmail which display it's incredible strength Viking vs Samurai (http://www.spike.com/full-episode/viking-vs-samurai/31558) I hope i didnt come off too strong i'm just trying to dispel the misconception that butted mail is junk. Us Maillers are protective of our craft ~.o
QuoteThe overwhelming majority of maille from the twelth to the fifteenth century was butted maille and about fifty fifty in the sixteenth and was still frequently used throughout.
If you can post some substantiaition of this with a little more meat to it than the TV shows sighted i'd very much be interested to read them. You might want to run this idea through here http://www.erikds.com/viewforum.php?f=3 ( Erik D. Schmidt is generally acknowledged to be the worlds leading authority on maille armour ) and see what these folks think as well as here http://www.armourresearchsociety.org/ ( some serious experts in the field post on these boards ). If you can in fact back up what you've stated with a substantial body of meaningfull evidence it would completely change to way maille is viewed in the acedemic and curratorial world. Given the virtual non existance of any surviving European examples ( I had heard rumors of a single possibly butted shirt being excavated froma 10th century find in Eastern Europe but haven't seen any print documentation of it, if it exists it would be the only European example i've personally heard of ) or period written records ( funnery lists, armoury records ect.) the accepted idea is that riveted was the standard with occasional early examples ( some Roman ) of alternating riveted and solid/punched rings based on surviving European examples and documentation. If you can actually prove what you've stated it would be huge. I'd very much like to read what else you've got on this.
I would also like to see actual support for your claims. I have never seen any examples of European butted maille being used in any time period. Every documented case of maille found for the Vikings (since you are quoting The Deadliest Warrior) has been riveted. I wouldn't use any television program, least of all the deadliest warrior as a source for information. Their episodes are full of errors and even the equipment used is wrong in many instances (see my post on the Dealiest Warrior Thread for examples).
Here is an online link summarizing some information from viking finds. It is just a quick search, and I realize there are better documented sources for finds of historical maille. It is a start.
http://www.vikingsonline.org.uk/resources/authenticity/chainmail/index.htm
Another thought was for the you tube video. The guy is testing an axe cut against butted maille on top of clothing and toilet paper. Seriously, there is no resistance to the cut and that proves nothing. The real issue of the effectiveness for maille should be a thrust as in a spear, sword tip, or knife. Butted rings will separate much easier than a closed riveted piece of maille, and that is just simple physics. I am open to any REAL documented proof of what you say, but highly doubt you are going to find much support for your argument.
I should note that the maille in the youtube clip YouTube - Machinwelded maille cut battleax is not butted its welded, I believe this might in fact be the fella from Atlanta Armoury who makes welded chainmaille predominantly for SCA use, so the video does not show butted but welded maille ( hence the machinewelded maille in the clip title ). The axe appears to be Cold Steel.
I just watched a bit of the Deadliest Warrior video, theres a fair amount of stereotyping portrayed as fact and they do have some fact checking to do. Seems Museum Replicas Limited must have some sort of costuming supply gig with the production company as most all of the European weapons and armour are MRL which is not necessarily always the first stop for accurate gear. If the rest of the shows are of similar character while there is some valid information there they also contain alot of high school history stereotypes and some missinformation, I would veiw them as a launching platform for a direction to go in for further personal research rather than as a Cliff Notes on history that you would quote as hard fact.
I'm not intending to imply i'm the be all end all, but the general census on butted mail is inaccurate. I stated previously that those were not the best examples they were simply the only ones i could find to upload. I personally despise deadliest warrior, it will take two weapons and run them both through two DIFFERENT tests and call the results deffinitive. What i could take from that video was a slash on chainmail. http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-European-Oriental-Including-Collection/dp/1443791830/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1249328156&sr=8-20 This is a reproduction of training manuals for warriors of the period it distinctly mentions "a knights ally is mail" then goes on comparing the merits between"joined links" and unjoined links and concludes that for the humble warrior, butted rings are equitable. Also in research for a european anthropology class we spoke with the proprietor of a musuem who concluded that very few examples of butted mail remain since wealthy knights would store and preserve armor whereas as the general soldier would likely either replace or or use his armor more frequently also it was an item of value and frequently traded. Repairs seem likely to have been needed often for both but durring wealthy periods many knights would go with the fashion of the period. I would also like to add that mail was never effective against thrusting blows, rivitted or otherwise, there simply isn't enough surface area for it to disperse that sort of trauma. And chris i appologize. I can tell i have offended you and that was not my intention. ALS, you are correct and that was my error, there are very few tests of chainmail i can find online.
Quotehttp://www.amazon.com/Handbook-European-Oriental-Including-Collection/dp/1443791830/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1249328156&sr=8-20 This is a reproduction of training manuals for warriors of the period it distinctly mentions "a knights ally is mail" then goes on comparing the merits between"joined links" and unjoined links and concludes that for the humble warrior, butted rings are equitable.
I am very familiar with Dean, former head of currations at the Tower armouries around the turn of the last century and while he made some valuable contributions some of his suppositions much as Stone's have been disproven as new evidence has come to light in the 100 years since. Claude Blaire's work around the same time period has held up much better under scrutiny over the years. If I recall correctly when he speaks of " joined links " he is refering to riveted links and when he referes to " unjoined links " he is refering to punched solid rings.
Do you happen to recall what museum? I know a currator or two and would be curious to know who it was as i'm unfamiliar with anyone in the curratorial world espousing this view.
QuoteI would also like to add that mail was never effective against thrusting blows, rivitted or otherwise, there simply isn't enough surface area for it to disperse that sort of trauma.
Actually you would be surprised how effective maille over a good gamboison is against the thrust of the swords of the day ( broader more spatulated tips as they were more geared twords cutting ) and broadhead arrows. I will go looking for my friend from NYHFA's testing he posted on myarmoury its quite illuminating. Also Erik Schmidt has done some test work ( his riveted maille is held to be the most historic currently being made today ) and riveted maille is hard to break unless a thrust specific point, bodkin head arrows or the more ridgid hard tapering diamond cross section of 15th century war swords is used.
I don't think you've offended Chirs ( whom I know, if he lived closer i'd have him working for me part time) I think its that your putting forward something that goes against the accepted modern thought on maille based on the evidence to hand, and theres alot of it, and that he would like to see what your source material is for making the statement. This is common among harcore arms and armour collectors and living history re-enactors of which Chris is both. Please do not take offense but a 100 year old text and a college class will not hold up under acedemic scrutiny, do you have more material that you can sight? In order to disprove the modern concept you will need a fair amount of evidence to the contrary to be taken seriously as there is so much evidence to the contrary. If you can prove out what you assert it would be huge, i've made 100 butted maille hauberks over the years, 4 or 5 dozen butted coiffes, I make almost none now as the demand for riveted ( i'd love to work in riveted but no body seems to be able to keep the supplies in stock with any reliability ) and its greater avaliability from India has made it redilly accecible in the re-enactment and Western Martial Arts community. If you can bring a preponderacne of evidence to bear to prove your statement it would be huge deal but you will need much more material to make your case than what you have so far. Do you have more or can you find more source material to back up your theory, it would be a complete reverse of modern acedemic thought if get together enough eveidence to support it.
I will email my professor he should be able to get me the name of the fellow. I unerstand that there is a lot of literature to suggest that riveted was the standard, but the majority of this is derived from surviving peices of armor and thus i cannot give you difinitive proof. I will dig through my library to try and find which book it was, but there was a study or mortal wounds sustained by victims believed to have been armored knights who either died in the battlefield or a hospital shortly after. The overwheling majority of the wounds were consistant with punctures, and while wearing a gambeson some also perished due to internal hemorging from blunt trauma (such as a sword blow that failed to cut links). In tests of mail (all using wrought armor i should add) they found a damage pattern more consistant with butted rings than rivited (i should note that i recall they were wedge rivited as was common of the period). I cannot say this is definnitive, unfortunately i have less experience with maille than i do with other crafts of the period, but i will look for more information to share.
I should also note, when making rivited maille myself i have converted a pair of mini bolt cutters to be able to punch a hole i then take a coil of galvanized steel rings and toss them in my one brick forge. Clear the aera for a while, the fumes from galvanized metal are poisonous. Once it has burned off i take them out and let tham normalize I then cut them with an overlap and pound them flat with a bushing i've made, then punch with my modified mini bolts. I'll generally use 18 guage for rivets in 16 guage. Give this method a try, you can manufacture very quickly, though i wouldnt call it period.
QuoteI'll generally use 18 guage for rivets in 16 guage. Give this method a try, you can manufacture very quickly, though i wouldnt call it period.
Most of my time is tied up in the production of all our plate offerings, the only way I could effectively work with riveted is by being able to obtain pre punched rings and rivets or wedges ( which is used depends on time period and sometimes nationality ). Theres just not enough hands in the shoppe to detail somebody to flatten and punch rings all day as well as assemble and still churn out the other armour commitments we have.
QuoteI will dig through my library to try and find which book it was, but there was a study or mortal wounds sustained by victims believed to have been armored knights who either died in the battlefield or a hospital shortly after. The overwheling majority of the wounds were consistant with punctures, and while wearing a gambeson some also perished due to internal hemorging from blunt trauma (such as a sword blow that failed to cut links). In tests of mail (all using wrought armor i should add) they found a damage pattern more consistant with butted rings than rivited
The only two titles dealing with that subject matter that i'm aware of are Armour from the Battle of Wisby ( island of Gotland 1361 ) and Blood Red Roses ( Wars of the Roses ). I don't recall anything about butted maille in either text but perhaps you have a text i'm unfamiliar with. I'm also currious how they were able to acertain the soft tissue injuries described. Wisby and Roses are working primarily from exhumed remains form both battles and as such were in large part only able to evaluate the injuries which had damaged bone as this was the only visible evidence of injury on the 450-550 year old remains. If you can come up with the title your thinking of I would very much like to obtain a copy.
QuoteClear the aera for a while, the fumes from galvanized metal are poisonous. Once it has burned off i take them out and let tham normalize
Pick up mechanics wire/black iron wire, its steel wire straight from the puller so its scale black but you don't have to worry about the galvinization fumes while cooking it. You can find rolls in the harware store or most any metal place that will sell by the sheet.
You did not offend me at all. Allan is right in that I would welcome evidence to the contrary, but I researched that issue extensively before buying my own hauberk, chausses and coif, and I have seen no evidence at all for butted maille except for what were believed to be minor field repairs for a small patch. I also agree with Allan that with a good gambeson, riveted maille can offer fair protection against period weapons.....even with a thrust. It would be interesting if you could find solid archeological evidence for its use.
You have to be careful using modern tests of any armor to substantiate such a claim though. Just because our modern minds come up with new ideas, test it, and prove that it could be effective on a battlefield through testing doesn't make it accurate historically. I see plenty of Roman enthusiasts wearing boiled leather cuirasses and segmentatas too, but all evidence strongly supports arguments to the contrary.
PS. I take those comments as a major compliment coming from you Allan. Thanks.
Before i get into my comment, Chris, i'm glad you are not bothered i've been lurking in the forum for weeks absorbing topics and i have enjoyed reading your posts and endeavors and would mean you no slight.
ALS, it's true, there is no "fast" way to make riveted mail, but a good setup goes a long way. I use Galvanized because i can get it in very specific sizes offordably and it will maintain a more period look and hold up longer than other mild steels, if the wire you speak of will hold up similarly i'll definately need to check it out ~.o
I'll rifle through my documents when i get into my storage junk and i'm still waiting on a reply from proffessor Nuepert.
Talk to you soon fellows :)
I read some place that the Japanese used butted rings to hold the sections of their armour togeather instead thread or cord. The reason given for the Japanese using butted rings while Europeans didn't was that the Japanese used steel rings while Europeans used iron. Plus the fact that the Japan only used rings to cover the areas between plate sections.
Does anyone know if this is true or not, I can't find the book I read it in and fear it might have been in a lot sent to Half Price books.
QuoteThe reason given for the Japanese using butted rings while Europeans didn't was that the Japanese used steel rings while Europeans used iron. Plus the fact that the Japan only used rings to cover the areas between plate sections.
Bear, the iron used for maille rings in Europe was of very hig quality and thus strength, the key with the Japanese maille of which you speak is that the carbon content is high enough to be tempered so the rings were heat treated like a blade to make them harder which you cannot do with iron due to lack of carbon content.
Quoteif the wire you speak of will hold up similarly i'll definately need to check it out ~.o
Its consistantly gauged throughout, we actually us it for the blackened maille option we offer for our helmets so you shouldn't have a problem.
Quote from: SirRichardBear on August 05, 2009, 07:40:33 AM
I read some place that the Japanese used butted rings to hold the sections of their armour togeather instead thread or cord. The reason given for the Japanese using butted rings while Europeans didn't was that the Japanese used steel rings while Europeans used iron. Plus the fact that the Japan only used rings to cover the areas between plate sections.
Does anyone know if this is true or not, I can't find the book I read it in and fear it might have been in a lot sent to Half Price books.
The Japanese also sewed their rings to cloth behind each ring which means they move less independently than the European maille. If you go to the armored personas thread, you may be able to see the use of maille in my Japanese armor. It it placed to cover the gaps between splints on the shins and on the arm guards.
Thanks it good to have verification from other sources when you read something.
an interesting topic you've got going on here. Some things to consider though on the topic of rejecting a claim that butted maile could have been just as common as riveted maile.theres a quote that is pretty much a standard in scientific study, don't know if other academic fields apply it as well though, (I study science, not so much history)
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
Basicly a warning to not reject a thought too soon just because it is not easily supported. There are many "facts" or "known truths" that have no solid evidence, yet they are still accepted as true simply because there is not an apparently better solution.
we can all agree that spoons are not a modern creation, correct? well earlier this year I met a man who studies of all things spoons. he's a wood worker who has spend the last several years studying wooden spoons from historical eras. according to his sources, there are very few surviving samples of wooden spoons. does this mean that only metal spoons were used? no, it means that the metal spoons survived better. obviously because of the stronger material, but also because they were more expencive and so better care was taken of them.
IF, and I do stress if, Macbain's claim is correct; that the common soldier was given butted maile, while the knights, and those with money had the riveted maile, what are the chances that the butted mail has as good an opportunity for survival into modern times?
And yes, I did just ask a serious academic question using a spoon as a premises for possibility. :P
QuoteBasicly a warning to not reject a thought too soon just because it is not easily supported. There are many "facts" or "known truths" that have no solid evidence, yet they are still accepted as true simply because there is not an apparently better solution.
While this is all well and good, there is no evidence either written, artistic ie. painted or drawn, or archelogical of butted maille made or used in Europe so the burden of proof falls on the claimant, and they will have to have some pretty substantial proof to do so. Simply stating that something is does not make it so, if this were the case I would have had a million dolllars in the bank yesterday. Your talking about trying to change the current thought on the subject reached by museum currators and acedemics the world over and your going to have to present a body of proof to even begin to have a discussion as thats what they used to arrive at thier conclusions, written, artistic and archeological evidence. You will need like to refute like. There is research and evidence behind the modern thought on maille in Europe and one will need research and evidence to posit an idea that is contrary to it to be taken seriously.
The idea that you don't need to have proof, only plausible theory, for something to be taken seriously as real, is a very slippery slope in modern arms and armour use. This idea is how you end up going to a 15th century Hundered Years War re-enactment and end up surrounded by guys in fantasy leather armour looking like orcs. Orcs and fantasy gear are fine and dandy for ren faire or LARPING but for WMA or living history re-enactment not really going to work, for these endevors proof is needed to give conetext for both period and place usage of arms and armour as accuracy is the goal. People can come up with some very elaborate theories to justify using things in the field of arms and armour, by way of example, I once had a fella in the SCA try to convince me that they had duct tape in the Viking era, and he had a very elborate construct to justify it, complete rubish but there was more than a bit of time and thought that had gone into it.
If the original presenter of the idea that there was butted maille in Europe is ever able to present a substantial body of proof equivalent to that which was used to arrive at modern thought on the subject it would be huge, it would revoulutionize the way its thought about and I would love to see him do that, as I stated earlier I used to make tones of butted maille in the past but now there is very little demand, but without that body of evidence the idea will not even be taken seriously.
Just an offering:
The Royal Armoury at Leeds concluded that, "...it is almost impossible to penetrate using any conventional medieval weapon..." A good sword blow, arriving in exactly perpendicular angle to surface, could cut through the links; when the mail was not riveted a well placed thrust from a spear or thin sword could penetrate, and a poleaxe or halberd blow could break through the armour, but generally mail provided excellent protection to the soldier.
Yes or No?
Maille is a very good defense, the reasons for the developmemnt of plate to in large part eventually suplant maille as the standard for body armour are manyfold, but roughly 1) medieval European armies increasing relaince on large numbers of missle troops, archers or crossbowman and the development of the bodkin arrow head for armour pierceing, 2) the growing focus and increasing numbers of infantryman on the field, with better armour and increasingly armed with pole arms, 3) changes in sword blade design to a hallow ground sharply tapered blade much more suited to thrusting.
Maille is a good stout defense and plate armour never managed to eclipse it completley.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue that butted maile was the norm, or even common, really, I'm here simply for the sake of argument since more is learned from argument and debate then is from simply accepting something.
Now vikings having duct tape is an absurd argument because there is a recorded date of creation. But butted maile in essence is an un-finished product, so even if it wasn't used, there is the possibility of it being used. The same as an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, the mere possibility of something is not evidence either. But it is grounds to open argument.
As faulty as the arguments in favor of butted maile are, what sources do you have that positively deny the use? I'll take your word that modern academics accept that butted maile was not used, but surely there has to be a better reason then finding a large number of riveted maile armors vs. finding almost no butted maile armors.
Quote from: jcbanner on August 28, 2009, 10:22:00 AM
As faulty as the arguments in favor of butted maile are, what sources do you have that positively deny the use? I'll take your word that modern academics accept that butted maile was not used, but surely there has to be a better reason then finding a large number of riveted maile armors vs. finding almost no butted maile armors.
Unless you fell like answering the last question just for the sake of discussion, go ahead and scratch it out. Reading though some other topics here I saw you post that in studying armor, if there is not direct evidence to show the existence of something, even it it was a likely possibility, it didn't exist. At that point it becomes an argument of philosophy and I get enough of that in science.
QuoteUnless you fell like answering the last question just for the sake of discussion, go ahead and scratch it out. Reading though some other topics here I saw you post that in studying armor, if there is not direct evidence to show the existence of something, even it it was a likely possibility, it didn't exist. At that point it becomes an argument of philosophy and I get enough of that in science.
I manufacture armour for a living and deal with a large array of folks wanting it for many different reasons, ren faire use, larping, simple collecting, Western Martial Arts, various fight organiztions and living history folks as well comming into contact with museum folks and acedemics. The first three groups have accuracy as a secondary or further back concern, the last sets of folks pay a great deal of attention to accuracy and do a great deal of study as an adjunct to martial study or re-enacting or obviously in the case of museums and acedemics thier jobs. They avoid " could have beens " as much as is possible, and there is a pretty large knowlege base out there of life during those times. There are of course holes in our knowlege but rather than fudge it, unless there is some evidence pointing the way they prefer to not speculate to maintain accuracy. If they set that aside that is where the slippery slope comes in, at that point anyone can claim anything they want is accurate based simply on " you can't prove they didn't have it ". In the case of butted maille there simply is no record, either written, artistic or archeological of butted maille being made or used in Europe. There are several woodcuts from the 15th and 16th century showing maille makers at work in thier shoppes and they are all manufacturing riveted maille. In the face of this there is simply no reason to conclude other wise at this time. Will some one stumble upon a find at some point in the future that may change this, its certainly possible, it happens all the time and would be a big deal in terms of growing the knowlege base, but there is currently simly no evidence at all of its existance and thus no reason to conclude it was used in the face of that.
You can of course have the " who'd win in a fight Spiderman or Superman " theoretical discussion about it, but this will of course be devoid of the crucial determiner of truth, facts and proof. As i've said several times if it turns out someday that " the find " turns up it would be great and would certainly make me happy but until then the likelyhood that you'll change minds with " well they could have " is fairly small.
http://www.armourarchive.org/essays/essay__maille_timetable.shtml
I was under the impression that the discussion was regarding the medieval and renaissance periods based on the following statement by Macbain
QuoteThe overwhelming majority of maille from the twelth to the fifteenth century was butted maille and about fifty fifty in the sixteenth and was still frequently used throughout.
.
I am familiar with both the armour archive where I post fairly often, and the chart linked to, but the mixed butted link solid link examples sighted in it are all pre Roman occupation or Roman occupation Celt examples from nearly 1000 years before the period under discussion. The only other example from the chart using any butted construction is an 19th century Caucus maille and plate shirt that may very well have come from Persia as there was considerable trade and exchange with Persia in this region and butted maille was common there from the 18th century on and regardless falls well out side of the period under discussion. If we're going to go that late the British were producing butted maille in sheets from machines in facotries that they were then turning around and selling to the Sudanese to make armour out of which the British would end up shooting holes through with machine guns at the battle of Ombdurman ( which Winston Chrurchill fought at ). I used to have have a very late 19th century suit of it in my collection.
I mentioned this fella earlier in this thread but really the guy to talk to is Erik D. Schmidt at The Mail REsearch Society http://www.themailresearchsociety.erikds.com/ he is regarded pretty much globally as THE expert in mail, he's the kind of guy that museums consult with.
More info for the researcher:
http://www.crofters.org/personal%20essays/Maille%20Construction%20in%20Renaissance%20Europe.pdf
A wide array of articles on maille avaliable in PDF format here http://www.themailresearchsociety.erikds.com/other_research_articles.html
ALS, you don't also happen to do the Greek Hoplite persona?
Quote from: Warrior_Monk on August 30, 2009, 02:56:14 PM
ALS, you don't also happen to do the Greek Hoplite persona?
Am I missing something here? Do you mean my Corinthian and Athenian impressions? I haven't seen anyone else on these forums attempt a Hoplite before.
Ouch! You have me Sir. I was more specifically wondering if he kitted out as ........a Spartan.
Monk, we don't do much before the Viking age with the exception of our round shield and Roman greaves. Chris actually did a fair amount of his own kit for that persona, hammering out his own greaves and breast plate as well as making his shield, all with an eye to extreme accuracy. There are not to many folks doing early classical work, Joe Pila from Lonely Mountain Forge http://www.lonelymountain.hoplologia.org/greek.htm is one of the few folks focussing on it and he does some very nice stuff in the period. There is of course the India made option but most if not all of it leaves something to be desired, unless your willing to do alot of your own reworking ( which is not uncommon, alot of Roman re-enactors do exactly that ).
Thank you Sir. I was wondering if you also went by the screen name of Dr Jim or Tom...in another set of social websites, that's why I asked. ;D
Chris may know who I'm talking about.
Quote from: Warrior_Monk on August 31, 2009, 10:26:14 AM
Thank you Sir. I was wondering if you also went by the screen name of Dr Jim or Tom...in another set of social websites, that's why I asked. ;D
Chris may know who I'm talking about.
http://www.myspace.com/doctorjim51
When you said that it sparked my memory that he is on my friends list on myspace. He has emailed me a few times talking about the Greek armor, but I do not know him well.
Manning Imperial makes the best stuff I have seen for Greek.
Chris is right, I completely forgot about Manning, they do excellent work ( so much so that I think they're booked about three years out ). Don't know Dr. Jim but he seems to take re-enacting pretty seriously.