Chain Mail

[Sir William]

Hardrada rode to battle, but he did not fight mounted, is that not so?

[Sir James A]

That's true, the Norman knights generally just had somewhat longer hauberks to cover the legs, if I recall correctly.

I read they may have been ankle length. Then they opened them down the center more to make horse riding more easily done

Are you sure you aren't thinking of surcoats? Early surcoats, particularly crusaders, were down to their ankles. I've not seen hauberks further than roughly knee length, and chausses seem to be the norm.

[scott2978]

Not sure how historical you're wanting to shoot for, but pin riveted maille is early medieval, and wedge riveted is late medieval. If you're not as discerning, my opinion is that wedge riveted is smoother and easier on the fabric arming garments and gets stuck and caught less often.

And if you are making a riveted hauberk by hand, you have my admiration.

Scott

[Sir Nate]

That's true, the Norman knights generally just had somewhat longer hauberks to cover the legs, if I recall correctly.

I read they may have been ankle length. Then they opened them down the center more to make horse riding more easily done

Are you sure you aren't thinking of surcoats? Early surcoats, particularly crusaders, were down to their ankles. I've not seen hauberks further than roughly knee length, and chausses seem to be the norm.

Nay, I was reading a history book on knights. I have 2 that just say knights on the cover. One I find to bentos source material, tho the other seems to be more for those new on the subject of knights.
The one that is for the newer oddly enough mentioned the ankle length hauberk. But then it did say they made hauberk a shorter. So if it did exist it may have been extremely brief, and in popular

[Mike W.]

Does the books cite any sources for that particular statement?
Be wary of books not written by academics, especially books with uncited sources (by cited I mean end notes, not just a bibliography).

[Sir Nate]

No it didn't. I was looking through the book here and there, everywhere and couldn't relocate. I'll stumble upon it soon enough. Plus history can be distracting at times.

[Lord Dane]

Crusader era 1200-1300 maille: Would round ring or flat ring be more applicable for dome riveted historical accuracy??

[scott2978]

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I believe alternating riveted rings and solid flat rings is appropriate for pretty much the entire period from 300AD until about 1450 when all riveted became the norm. I think in every picture of historical maille I've ever seen, from roman lorica hamata of 300AD to the 15th century, the riveted rings are round regardless of what type of rivet was used. Also I think the ring diameter of historical maille tends to be smaller than 9mm, and historical maille doesn't have the machine-like consistance of wire and ring diameters of modern reproductions. Of course historical maille is scarce today, because it was re-used and re-used until it was unservicable or until the 15th century when a nice haubergeon would be cut apart into voiders and standards etc. and continue to be re-used some more. That very nature of re-use makes even historical maille rather unreliable as a true guide to history. When rings get replaced, sometimes they are different size and/or different materials. You can see a LOT of pictures of actual historical maille here:

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=29331&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

[Sir Nate]

Hehehe.
I found a site with a list of links to historical finds of mail. Many of them at non alternating.
I just ordered a Hauberk that's non alternating riveted.
It's pretty interesting
http://modernchivalry.org/forum/index.php/topic,3013.msg46013.html#msg46013

[Sir William]

I believe maille leggings wouldn't be appropriate for the average Norman knight. Only King Harold and Duke William are depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry as wearing maille leggings. Additionally, though gamebsons can be documented to as early as the late 10th century, they didn't become widespread until the 13th century. To be more representative, I'd skip the gambeson and maille leggings.

I disagree about the gambeson in that I wouldn't "skip it".  Having worn heavy gauge hauberks over just thin under clothing I can tell you it is most uncomfortable after a few hours.  Even a thin gambeson can make all the difference- you don't see the really thick ones until the 13th C but you don't necessarily need one unless you're going to fight in it and are worried about blunt force trauma.  Unless you're going for a full custom piece, a lot of off-the-rack gambesons won't run you much more than $149, give or take.  Some are better than others, of course...my last one wasn't a historically accurate design, but it was custom-made for me and I think I paid that much or slightly more, but it included shipping from Ukraine (which was just bananas to me).

[Sir James A]

KoA has some off-the-rack gambesons for under $100 now, by "Lord of Battles".

I echo what Sir William said, don't skip a gambeson. Mail without a gambeson is VERY poor protection; the padding is what amplifies mail's ability to protect. Without padding the only thing absorbing the blow is your skin and bones, and that doesn't work well with steel.

[Mike W.]

Well if you intend on sparring, absolutely get yourself one. But if you're just doing living history for the mid 11th century, a gambeson would not be representative for the time period.

[Sir James A]

Well if you intend on sparring, absolutely get yourself one. But if you're just doing living history for the mid 11th century, a gambeson would not be representative for the time period.

Do you have a source for this?

[Mike W.]

I've come to understand that while gambesons do indeed date to the 10th century, their use was not widely adopted until the 13th century. While no specific sources come to mind, I've seen most historians agree that gambesons are not widely depicted in pictorial sources until the 13th century. It is possible for them to have been used, just not probable.

[Sir Wolf]

thats just it, there are no sources for gamesons or aketons before the crusades. the site james barker had said the europeans looking at the sarasins wondering about their padded garments.

the roman version isn't padded, save maybe the shoulder area and there are no pics or surviving examples, we only have the writings.