Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Riveted Maille and Padded Jack Tests (very photo intensive) Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 9, 10, 11  Next 
Author Message
Michael Edelson




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: New York
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 1:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh Knight wrote:
Now what I'd like to see more of is halfsword and spear and pollaxe thrust testing. Specifically, "place and push" tests, where you place your point with little particular force but then drive the point into the target (e.g., the armpit through a mail voider). We've done some preliminary experiments in my Schule, but nothing too formal against a properly mounted target.


Ask and you shall receive!

I just need to secure another piece of maille (this time a much smaller one would do) and I'm good to go. I have a good quality imported hauberk, but it's 9mm and no where near as good as Julio's.

Give me some time...I'll call it "Harnesfechten Tests".

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Christian Henry Tobler




PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 1:23 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hey Hugh,

Hugh Knight wrote:

The similarity to the coronal is only about "sticking"; safety can't be an issue with the pollaxe since the teeth actually make the hammer head less safe by helping to transmit all the force to the target. If the head were smooth it would be safer because not all the force would go into the target unless you hit it just perfectly. And sliding isn't a safety issue with the pollaxe; if the weapon slides there's no way the hammer head can cause damage, and the Dague (the pointy end for those who don't know) couldn't get at a gap either because it would be too close by then. Moreover, we know from the primary-source accounts that the Dague was often used for thrusting, so that's where they'd have put a coronal if they were worried about it.


That's not exactly where I'm going with this...my musing was that the hammer was a safer alternative to the axe blade (which if it slid could go somewhere you don't want). With the toothed hammer, you can place your blow and it goes where you want, finding ready purchase. It might be a safer way to place a stout blow in relative safety.

Of course, if there's lots of iconography showing axe/hammer combos in war, versus tournament, then this little theory goes out the window.

It is however interesting that Falkner and Mair both show armoured combatants dueling with axe bladed models.

All the best,

Christian

Christian Henry Tobler
Order of Selohaar

Freelance Academy Press: Books on Western Martial Arts and Historical Swordsmanship

Author, In Saint George's Name: An Anthology of Medieval German Fighting Arts
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Hugh Knight




Usergroups: None

Location: San Bernardino, CA
Reading list: 34 books
Posts: 739
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 1:25 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Edelson wrote:
Ask and you shall receive!

I just need to secure another piece of maille (this time a much smaller one would do) and I'm good to go. I have a good quality imported hauberk, but it's 9mm and no where near as good as Julio's.

Give me some time...I'll call it "Harnesfechten Tests".


Excellent! One thing to consider is that the links in Julio's swatch may have been more reflective of the maile used in great hauberks, whereas the mail used in Haubergeons and Voiders tended to be lighter and of thinner cross-section (although still dense) and that Haubergeons and Voiders are more appropriate for a test of this sort.

We've already found that the point of a dagger or type XVA sword ot the Dague of a pollaxe slide quite nicely between the links of mail, and while they don't penetrate much if they don't break the links the mail still gives like a curtain, allowing for much deeper penetration to the target underneath than just the amount that the tip of the weapon sticks through the mail. But the question is: "how much penetration"? With a "place and push" thrust to the armpit, can you compress the mail and arming doublet (not heavily padded!!) enough to reach, for example, the Brachial Plexus? Additionally, when you wiggle the point back and forth after it's been placed, how much slicing damage can you achieve? Remember that you're up in the Fourth Guard of the halfsword (or the equivilent couched position with the spear or pollaxe) so your entire body weight and the strngth of your legs is driving it in.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Hugh Knight




Usergroups: None

Location: San Bernardino, CA
Reading list: 34 books
Posts: 739
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 1:43 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Christian Henry Tobler wrote:
That's not exactly where I'm going with this...my musing was that the hammer was a safer alternative to the axe blade (which if it slid could go somewhere you don't want). With the toothed hammer, you can place your blow and it goes where you want, finding ready purchase. It might be a safer way to place a stout blow in relative safety.

Of course, if there's lots of iconography showing axe/hammer combos in war, versus tournament, then this little theory goes out the window.


OK, I see what you meant, now. Well, let's look at it from another angle, then: First, while there is a preponderance of Axe+Hammer pollaxes in the non-Fechtbuch iconography, there's still plenty of examples of pollaxes of the Hammer+Spike configuration, and if the axe blade was the choice for lethal combat then we wouldn't see them on the field of battle as we do (see attached picture).

Moreover, while Le Jeu de La Hache is ambiguous as to its intent vis-a-vis lethal vs. sportive combat, Talhoffer is not, and he shows only Hammer+Spike pollaxes.

Quote:
It is however interesting that Falkner and Mair both show armoured combatants dueling with axe bladed models.


Which of Mair's books showes armored pollaxe? I have access to the 1540 one:
http://www.thehaca.com/Manuals/Mair/267.jpg
And the Munich one (parts 1 and 2):
http://mdz10.bib-bvb.de/~db/bsb00006570/image...?seite=391
And both of them show unarmored combat (and it looks more like Meyer's Halberd than pollaxe combat anyway, but that's for another discussion), not armored.



 Attachment: 134.02 KB, Viewed: 4391 times
french destroy genoa.jpg


Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Dan Howard




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 2,263
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 3:33 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Christian Henry Tobler wrote:
Christopher, the reason we see thrusting swords later on in the period is probably because mail is the primary armour earlier. Even though it's next to impossible to cut through, a mail-clad arm or leg can still be broken or have horrible damage done to it otherwise because of the mail's flexibility.

Now, put pieces of plate over the mail and your sword stroke will have little effect. However, if you can thrust to the gaps between the plates and into the mail, now you're in business.

The other point to remember is that when mail is the primary armour it seems to have been more robust - using denser weaves and heavier links. When plate starts to emerge mail becomes lighter. It is a secondary armour being either worn under a coat of plates or only as gussets/voiders to cover gaps. So it would be far easier to thrust through these lighter mail variants using a sword. The heavier variants would not be compromised by any hand weapon short of a polearm or mounted lance. Unfortunately most of our surviving examples are of the latter variety and this gives a skewed perspective.

Great tests Mike thanks for sharing. I agree with your assessment of Julio's mail. It is impressive.


Last edited by Dan Howard on Thu 13 Sep, 2007 3:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Jeffrey Hull




Usergroups: None

Location: USA
Posts: 34
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 3:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I would suggest that a Type XII or XIII longsword would have cloven through the 30-layer jack.
JH

Knightly Dueling - the Fighting Arts of German Chivalry
View user's profile Visit poster's website
Dan Howard




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 2,263
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 3:43 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jeffrey Hull wrote:
I would suggest that a Type XII or XIII longsword would have cloven through the 30-layer jack.

Suggestions don't help much. We have had opposing "suggestions" for years. Mike has stepped up and done some impressive tests using the closest approximation to medieval mail I have ever seen in one of these tests. Of course it isn't perfect but it supercedes data from many previous tests.
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Edelson




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: New York
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 5:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Jeffrey Hull wrote:
I would suggest that a Type XII or XIII longsword would have cloven through the 30-layer jack.

Suggestions don't help much. We have had opposing "suggestions" for years. Mike has stepped up and done some impressive tests using the closest approximation to medieval mail I have ever seen in one of these tests. Of course it isn't perfect but it supercedes data from many previous tests.


Okay, I'm going to confess something...

I was waiting nervously for you to notice these tests, Dan. I was hoping you would approve, because your opinion is important to me.

I know the test is flawed on many levels but I was hoping it was good enough on enough levels to make a contribution, and now I know that it was. Thank you.

Now I can relax. Happy

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Robin Smith




Usergroups: None

Location: Louisiana
Likes: 4 pages
Reading list: 17 books
Posts: 735
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 5:52 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

But isn't 14ga just alittle heavier than the historical norm? I'm not disputing the quality of Julio's maille, but I was under the impression that maille was generally around 16-18ga with 14ga being on the far end of historical examples....
A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Benjamin H. Abbott




Usergroups: None

Location: New Mexico
Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 980
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 6:33 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Great tests!

I'm amazed by how well the katana did. It looks so tiny beside those longsword, yet it made the biggest gash in the jack.

Did you try the pollaxe point against the jack?
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michael Edelson




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: New York
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 6:39 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
Great tests!

I'm amazed by how well the katana did. It looks so tiny beside those longsword, yet it made the biggest gash in the jack.

Did you try the pollaxe point against the jack?


No, I didn't. I still have enough material to do so, however, so I'll post a followup. I'm also going to try the Albion Tritonia.

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jared Smith




PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 7:02 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael,

Thank you for taking the time, risk to your treasured collection, and thought plus time to put together such a great post.

I have a suspicion that there could be some serious trauma occurring in those cutting tests where the sword edges showed little to no damage. Please consider someday supplementing the "cutting" tests by using a hog leg, deer leg, or similar large carcass instead of the wood pell. (Many hunters take select sections of meat and could easily provide you with a complete deer chest section about two months from now.) They tend to reveal obvious "bruises" even though the meat is no longer a living thing.

I have wrapped copious amounts of wet newspaper around wood limbs such that "cutting style swords" (Albion Knight) could not penetrate through the newspaper far enough to reach the wood. Despite that, the energy of the impact broke wood limbs I consider stronger than human leg bones. In those cases the sword edge had zero damage, but the pseudo-victim was still in serious trouble. Historical accounts of tournament deaths during 12th through 13th century "mail era" often used phrases like "died of bruises", or "died of complications from bruises the day after/ few days after." I don't know how gambesons of that time would compare to your padded jack material, but suspect the jack + mail test over a carcass might still reveal bruising effects and breakage of bones within appropriate sized carcasses if the cutting impacts were more lethal than we realize.

Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence!
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Usergroups: None

Location: New Mexico
Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 980
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 7:05 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I have to say that your arrow tests are considerably lacking, especially when compared with the sword tests. You've got excellent replica mail, fantastic replica swords... and modern arrows shot by a modern bow.

As far as I know, few period arrowheads were much at all like that modern point. Many had cutting edges. The classic type-16 arrowhead is a good example.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michael Edelson




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: New York
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 7:36 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
I have to say that your arrow tests are considerably lacking, especially when compared with the sword tests. You've got excellent replica mail, fantastic replica swords... and modern arrows shot by a modern bow.

As far as I know, few period arrowheads were much at all like that modern point. Many had cutting edges. The classic type-16 arrowhead is a good example.


Hey, I'm a swordsman, not an archer. Happy

Unfortunately, since I can't pull a 150lb or even 100lb bow, and since only a compound bow can guarantee me 100% accuracy, I'm pretty much stuck with the bow/arrows I have.

However, the bow is not important...it could be a period warbow or a pneumatic air launcher, what matters is the arrow head and the power behind it. I can't match a 150lb bows 140+J of kinetic, but you yourself calculated that I can get 108J. 108J is more than a 100lb bow shooting 1600 grain arrows, is it not? So the power can't be too far off.

If you can think of a way to get medieval arrowheads onto modern aluminum or carbon arrows, I'd love to give the arrow tests another go. I don't think bodkins would be too different from modern field points (they're a tad pointier but they still have no cutting edge which means no jack penetration). Medieval broadheads, especially sharp ones, now that would be interesting. Got any ideas?

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Hugh Knight




Usergroups: None

Location: San Bernardino, CA
Reading list: 34 books
Posts: 739
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 7:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
I have to say that your arrow tests are considerably lacking, especially when compared with the sword tests. You've got excellent replica mail, fantastic replica swords... and modern arrows shot by a modern bow.

As far as I know, few period arrowheads were much at all like that modern point. Many had cutting edges. The classic type-16 arrowhead is a good example.


May I suggest another look at the study? While neither his bow nor his arrows were precisely the same as medieval ones they simulated them rather accurately in terms of the force they hit with. Moreover, the true arrow of choice for armored opponent's was the bodkin point, which isn't all that different from the field point he actually used, at least when it comes to penetrating mail. Had he been trying to penetrate plate it wouldn't have been a good analog, but for this it was fine. The arrows with cutting edges would have done considerably worse against mail than his field points did--that's the point (no pun intended) of bodkin points.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Michael Edelson




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: New York
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 7:45 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh Knight wrote:
The arrows with cutting edges would have done considerably worse against mail than his field points did--that's the point (no pun intended) of bodkin points.


I agree completely (and thanks for your support! Happy ), but...I think arrows with cutting edges would have done much better against the jack. In fact I'd wager good money that a broadhead, if sharp enough, would pierce a 30 layer jack 9 times out of 10.

Of course if the jack was worn over mail, that wouldn't do the archer much good, and that's probably the point (pun intended).

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Shawn Henthorn




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: Amarillo TX
Reading list: 5 books
Posts: 134
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 8:03 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I love these tests of yours! It would deffinatly seem like a foot soldier wearing good mail over a 10+ layer jack (on the torso and hard parts of the arms) would be and absolute bugger for an archer to take down. If you have something to penetrate the mail you cant get the jack, if you can get the jack you cant get the mail. It would have been kind of funny to see (atleast until the soldier went down from internal trauma anyway Eek! )
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Usergroups: None

Location: San Bernardino, CA
Reading list: 34 books
Posts: 739
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 8:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Edelson wrote:
I agree completely (and thanks for your support! Happy ), but...I think arrows with cutting edges would have done much better against the jack. In fact I'd wager good money that a broadhead, if sharp enough, would pierce a 30 layer jack 9 times out of 10.

Of course if the jack was worn over mail, that wouldn't do the archer much good, and that's probably the point (pun intended).


I think that's exactly the point: The combination of a jack and an haubergeon gave the wearer superb protecttion from cutting, smashing and piercing blows while being significantly cheaper and easier to move in than a breastplate and vambraces, although some did take to wearing breastplates (no backplates) over their jacks, too (perhaps because they faced so many men at arms with pollaxes?). And don't forget that some jacks apparently had mail and or plates stitched into them; that would have been quite a formidable defense.

Have you read the article on Jacks published by the Company of St. George in Europe? It's in Dragon number 3, which can be downloaded here:
http://www.companie-of-st-george.ch/cms/?q=en/Dragons
There's some information in Dragon #5 as well, but I think it's less relevant.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Benjamin H. Abbott




Usergroups: None

Location: New Mexico
Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 980
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 8:56 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I didn't mean to be rude, but I found the problem rather glaring while looking over the pictures.

Yes, the kinetic energy is about right, though an extremely heavy bow shooting heavy arrows at close range would have quite a bit more. However, kinetic energy may not be the only thing that matters. For example, a heavier arrow would have more momentum. Ideally, you want to get as close to the real thing as you can.

The arrowhead bothers much more, however. Look at this Royal Armouries page for some an overview of medieval arrowhead types:

https://www.royalarmouries.org/extsite/view.jsp?sectionId=3006

As you can see, none of these arrowheads, with the possible exception of type 5, looks anything like that modern field point.

Quote:
It would deffinatly seem like a foot soldier wearing good mail over a 10+ layer jack (on the torso and hard parts of the arms) would be and absolute bugger for an archer to take down.


I wouldn't be so sure about that. As far as I can tell, arrows with cutting edges were far more common than those without.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michael Edelson




Usergroups: 
Donating Members

Location: New York
Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032
PostPosted: Thu 13 Sep, 2007 9:18 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:

The arrowhead bothers much more, however. Look at this Royal Armouries page for some an overview of medieval arrowhead types:

https://www.royalarmouries.org/extsite/view.jsp?sectionId=3006

As you can see, none of these arrowheads, with the possible exception of type 5, looks anything like that modern field point.


Actually, number 5 looks a lot like a field point!

But I suppose that to be as thorough as the sword portion of the test, I'd need several different types of arrowheads. Perhaps for the next such test I'll see what I can do about getting a decent variety. I'm particularly curious about A. A looks like it would be killer on mail but wouldn't do much against a jack.

Compare it to the Rondel dagger, which pieced all the layers of that jack...but just barely. No matter how hard we tried, we couldn't get it to go all the way through (it pierced enough to annoy the guy under the jack, nothing more). It just couldn't push aside all those weaves of linen and it had no cutting edge to slice the threads, much like, I suspect, arrowhead A.

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Riveted Maille and Padded Jack Tests (very photo intensive)
Page 3 of 11 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 9, 10, 11  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2013 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum