Hamata by Erik Schmidt

[Tarbicus]

Thanks very much for the information, John and Erik.

[John M McDermott]

Here is an interesting quote I picked up from another thread.


"Their infantry drawn up in front of the horsemen stood as firm as a wall, and every soldier had a thick gambeson and mail hauberks so thick and strong that our arrows had no effect.I saw soldiers with from one to ten arrows sticking in them, still trudging on in their ranks." - Beha Ad-Din, the life of Saladin.

[Erik D. Schmid]

I like that quote as well John. However, at that time there were several kinds of mail being used. We can't be sure exactly what style the crusaders were wearing. They could have been wearing a very robust style, a very thick aketon, or a combination of both. There is a large amount of research still needing to be done in that area.

[Dan Howard]

The Scythian find is definitely dodgy.

Dan, can you expand on this please?

I have had a good look for my notes but can't find them. Will elaborate when they turn up.

[Dan Howard]

Here is an interesting quote I picked up from another thread.


"Their infantry drawn up in front of the horsemen stood as firm as a wall, and every soldier had a thick gambeson and mail hauberks so thick and strong that our arrows had no effect.I saw soldiers with from one to ten arrows sticking in them, still trudging on in their ranks." - Beha Ad-Din, the life of Saladin.

Here is the exact translation from Bahā’al-Dīn, The Life of Saladin, (Ch. CXVII), in "What Befell Sultan Yusuf", by Abu el-Mehasan Yusef ibn-Rafi ibn-Temun el-Asadi.

The Norman infantry were described as,

"drawn up in front of the cavalry, stood firm as a wall, and every foot-soldier wore a vest of thick felt and a coat of mail so dense and strong that our arrows made no impression on them… I saw some with from one to ten arrows sticking in them, and still advancing at their ordinary pace without leaving the ranks."

This is ambiguous. Firstly we don't know whether the padding described is the normal gambeson or whether it was an additional layer of felt worn over the top. Secondly, as Erik said, we don't know what sort of mail was being worn.

[jsantell]

John, How much did the armour set you back?
Juan Santell

[Crispvs]

Peronis wrote:
"perhaps one of my colleagues has a picture they could send"

Unfotunately I do not have a digital camera so cannot help with my own photo. However, Robinson featured a photograph of the lunt mail. I believe it is paralleled by a very similar piece from the Saalburg.

Crispvs

[Peroni]

Salvete,

Many thanks Crispus, I'll scan the pic in Robinson tonight and add to the message board.

The only other pic I could find was a rough sketch by Michael Simkins. (Not Connolly as I first thought).



Regards,

[Neuraleanus]

:? From the drawing, this almost looks like a mixture of welded and stamped rings. Awhile back I tryed making heat welded rings and the results that I obtained looked alot like the overlapped rings shown in the drawing.

[Peroni]

Salvete,

Erik,

Here is the small photo taken from Robinson's "The armour of imperial Rome"



The book describes the mail as:

"Fragment of fine bronze [could be brass] mail from the Lunt Roman fort, Baginton, Coventry. Second half of first century AD. (Lunt Museum)

As you can see the mail is very fine, and all the links are separated. Visible near the centre of the picture are details of riveting.

I hope this is of some help.

Kind regards,

[John M McDermott]

Here are tests showing the effectiveness of this kind of mail combined with a subarmalis as pictured herein.

http://es.geocities.com/cotasmalla/test2.htm

[Caius Titius Verus]

WOW
Its AMAZING!!! Up to 5-10m hock:

I really have to get me one of these! Now we always thought segmentata was the better protection against arrows... Proven wrong I would say!

Thanks for these experiments, now we finally know for certain!
Best regards,
Tom

[Martin Moser]

Now we always thought segmentata was the better protection against arrows... Proven wrong I would say!
Thanks for these experiments, now we finally know for certain!

Certainly an interesting experiment with surprising results. I do not know enough about ancient mail to say that the results are valid in this respect, too, though. Now we would need somebody willing to sacrifice and test his modern segmentata under similar conditions to have some way of comparison.

I wonder, however, why it was that plate took over more and more in the middle ages? So much better for close combat that a possible disadvantage vs. arrows was accepted?

cheers,

Martin

[Caius Titius Verus]

Ummos says it, plate took over more and more in the middle ages...

But most of this plate armour did stop arrows! I've even seen an armour that had been shot at with a musket and there was not a hole, only a bent in the armour! But however I think we also have to take a look at the thickness of the armour... The medieval plate I saw was at least 3 mm thick or something like it, whereas the segmentata was only about 1 mm in thickness. Also plate armour would be a lot quicker to produce, and cheaper!

But I do agree that a test should be done on a segmentata because (this I overlooked in my previous post) they have a "bended" form, and so its possible that arrows would "scatter" of the armour rather than penetrate it.

best regards,
Tom

[Martin Wallgren]

Also plate armour would be a lot quicker to produce, and cheaper!

Humm! Than what? Segmentata or Maille?

Full Plate armour is some of the most expencive body protection of all time! A full plate armour would cost as much as a medium to large size farm!

Just wonder what you mean?!?

Have a nice day!

M