Chainmail

[Narkalui]

I've always been interested in why warriors would bother to buy and wear chainmail when it always seems so ineffective:

I do have to say that I always find it interesting when they test bows on armour. At least here they actually tell you that it's a 60 pound draw weight bow, when the English War Bow had a 120 - 130 pound draw weight and the Mongol Bow even greater than that! Plus the archers could pull the string back to their ear, not just the chin...

 

[Boneman]

Yeah, but.... Mithril....

 

[Dave]

why warriors would bother to buy and wear chainmail

Isn't it just a case of risk versus freedom of movement? Forget archers for a moment, that's just a distraction. The best warrior would be one who could strike down his opponents before they had a chance to strike him down i.e. offensive rather than defensive. Plate armour just means two men taking an extremely long time to slug it out. The stronger man with the greater constitution wins. Chain mail allows for quicker actions and therefore demands more skill. The lightweight but nimble swordsman wins. So, plate armour is for the unskilled, risk adverse warrior. Arrows and muskets, well that's a different ball game entirely.

However I've been wondering, would it be possible to update chainmail for the modern world. I've been watching a lot of American cop shows recently. There is a lot of shooting of guns at police officers, usually not wearing any armour. Kevlar armour is bulky and restricting. Could they not make some kind of Kevlar chainmail? Sorry, the question is a bit OT.

 

[Land Under Wave]

Check out the youtube channel 'Lindybeige'. He talks a lot about this kind of stuff--sword vs. spear, gladius vs. longsword, etc.--and he's actually done some historical re-enactment. (And he's British!)

 

[Temperance]

Archers?
Much like machine guns, they are traditionally area denial weapons.
Chances are you won't face someone firing right at you, it will be a matter of arrows hitting your general area.
So much of the momentum will be gone, glancing blows, downward strikes.

It's one of those slightly dull but oddly fascintating reads of setting machine guns and archers to "beat dead ground" with statistical analysis of how many "hits" per foot.

 

[The Big Peat]

Isn't it just a case of risk versus freedom of movement? Forget archers for a moment, that's just a distraction. The best warrior would be one who could strike down his opponents before they had a chance to strike him down i.e. offensive rather than defensive. Plate armour just means two men taking an extremely long time to slug it out. The stronger man with the greater constitution wins. Chain mail allows for quicker actions and therefore demands more skill. The lightweight but nimble swordsman wins. So, plate armour is for the unskilled, risk adverse warrior. Arrows and muskets, well that's a different ball game entirely.

However I've been wondering, would it be possible to update chainmail for the modern world. I've been watching a lot of American cop shows recently. There is a lot of shooting of guns at police officers, usually not wearing any armour. Kevlar armour is bulky and restricting. Could they not make some kind of Kevlar chainmail? Sorry, the question is a bit OT.

Chainmail tends to weigh as much as plate armour and the weight distribution is worse; I suspect the plate gave at least equal freedom of movement, if not better. We've got historical records of people leaping into their saddles in full plate (poor horse).

Famous last words but I'm not aware of any period of history where, if able to afford plate rather than mail, warriors preferred mail.

 

[-K2-]

However I've been wondering, would it be possible to update chainmail for the modern world. I've been watching a lot of American cop shows recently. There is a lot of shooting of guns at police officers, usually not wearing any armour. Kevlar armour is bulky and restricting. Could they not make some kind of Kevlar chainmail? Sorry, the question is a bit OT.

German Police when cut/stab weapons might be involved:

Shark repulsing mail:

That said, there are even newer types which will also carry current and are extremely small links (400 microns) I found in an old link (2007): Modern Chainmail - The Future Of Smart Textiles

K2

 

[sknox]

In what way does chainmail seem ineffective? It appears in many forms, in many cultures, across many centuries. Seems odd people would keep using something that didn't work. Can you give historical examples?

 

[Narkalui]

Oh no historic examples, just that whenever Uhtred of Bebbanburg stabs someone his sword seems to punch straight through their mail. Also, as the clip says, in all the other demonstration youtube clips the mail seems to be useless

 

[HareBrain]

It certainly didn't do much the protect the Norman soldiers in the 1980s ITV series Robin of Sherwood. But they perhaps made a mistake in fashioning it out of wool.

 

[Brian G Turner]

why warriors would bother to buy and wear chainmail when it always seems so ineffective:

I've never heard or seen anything previously about mail being ineffective. However, in fiction and film a hero's weapon can penetrate any form of armour regardless of realism.

Additionally, while there are a variety of armour tests on YouTube, ones such as the featured video don't use the underlying linen padding that was an integral part of the protection to absorb force from any blows.

 

[Vladd67]

 

[Justin Swanton]

Chainmail represents a trade-off. It's much easier than plate armour for a blacksmith to make. An average blacksmith works with small amounts of iron at one time and chainmail is just a lot of tiny rings. Chainmail supplies better protection than non-metallic armour, at least against slashing. It's also easier to maintain and repair - replacing rings during a campaign is relatively straightforward. It's not for nothing that the Roman Empire used chainmail when it was a republic, switched to the lorica segmentata in the early and mid-imperial phase, and reverted to chainmail in the Late Empire. Chainmail was cheaper: the Republic didn't have that much money and the late Empire found itself increasingly cash-strapped as it drew towards its end.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Excellent video - good to see the difference between cheap crap and battle-grade underlined.

It also underlines my complaint about how some tests are carried out - even Lindybeige had a video on bows vs armour where the bowman was literally a couple of feet from the target, which didn't seem a realistic test at all.

I remember when I was originally researching mail in Mediaeval Europe the two types I came across were the butted mail, but also welded mail - the former has the links closed by pliers and was considered apprentice work, while welding the links closed was seen as more professional.

So, yes, mail could be ineffective is if's nothing but cheaply-made junk - but the same applies to any weapons or armour.

However, it is really interesting to see the distinction between butted mail and riveted underlined.

 

[Justin Swanton]

I remember when I was originally researching mail in Mediaeval Europe the two types I came across were the butted mail, but also welded mail - the former has the links closed by pliers and was considered apprentice work, while welding the links closed was seen as more professional.

You're into military history?

 

[Vladd67]

Excellent video - good to see the difference between cheap crap and battle-grade underlined.

It also underlines my complaint about how some tests are carried out - even Lindybeige had a video on bows vs armour where the bowman was literally a couple of feet from the target, which didn't seem a realistic test at all.

I remember when I was originally researching mail in Mediaeval Europe the two types I came across were the butted mail, but also welded mail - the former has the links closed by pliers and was considered apprentice work, while welding the links closed was seen as more professional.

So, yes, mail could be ineffective is if's nothing but cheaply-made junk - but the same applies to any weapons or armour.

However, it is really interesting to see the distinction between butted mail and riveted underlined.

Shad is always good for opinions on medieval maters, or the realism of fantasy, computer game weapons, armour, castles, etc.

 

[sknox]

Ah, ok. You were talking about how mail is handled in fiction. As with all other technical topics, that varies wildly by author. Historical fiction writers tend to do better with armor than do fantasy writers, which I guess is about what one would expect. I overlook such things in fantasy, so long as the author plays by his own rules, but I get fussy with historical fiction.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Shad is always good for opinions on medieval maters, or the realism of fantasy, computer game weapons, armour, castles, etc.

I've watched a few videos of his before, but there are a few too many to keep up with. The ones I've watched have been good, though.

 

[.matthew.]

Well, he used to do a lot of good stuff, now most are clickbait videos. That said, his actual medieval ones are quite good.

But yea, at the end of the day any armour is only as good as its quality.

Also bear in mind that most 'soldiers' wouldn't be able to afford even chainmail, and battles weren't fought man to man but rather line to line, so individual skill is rarely paramount (plus no space to really maneuvre except the odd foot).

 

[paranoid marvin]

If you were going into battle you would wear the best armour you could afford. This may be plate armour, chainmail or a padded shirt; or a combination of the three. It was also a statement of status; wearing plate armour was probably the equivalent of wearing an expensive watch. Did it protect you from anything/everything? No , but the better your protection the more chance you had of sustaining a blow and fighting back, or at least surviving the wound. A crossbow shot at you from 100 yards would very likely pierce chain , but it may not, or it may lessen the impact to make it survivable; if you were wearing plate then the chances get higher, if a padded jerkin then lower.

Most would never be able to afford plate armour. Chain mail was more affordable, but then we have to consider that most soldiers on a battlefield were likely to have few possessions and little money, so any protection they had was likely pilfered from the enemy.