Mail Shirt - East Europe / Prob. 2nd half XV cent.

[awdaniec666]

Hi Roger,

I wonder, why have mail shirts and its parts generally so little corrosion after all this time? I mean, even looked after medival swords often look like minefields. Is the steel harder or mixed with other elements than blades, do you know how that comes?
Anyway I´m looking forward to read more of your kindly detailed contributions.

Cheers,
Patrick

[RogerFox]

Originally Posted by awdaniec666

Hi Roger,

I wonder, why have mail shirts and its parts generally so little corrosion after all this time? I mean, even looked after medival swords often look like minefields. Is the steel harder or mixed with other elements than blades, do you know how that comes?
Anyway I´m looking forward to read more of your kindly detailed contributions.

Cheers,
Patrick

Well, even mails suffer from corrosion in some cases. I have personally handled some piece with parts so corroded that they crumbled simply by moving the link.
But it is true that in general we have many examples of mails in fair condition.

However, we must make a clarification... medieval swords means swords before the 16th century, and the same goes for mails.

The most we go back in time, the less pieces we have and, usually, the worst are the conditions.

I think that in general the main reason that determines the state of conservation of an artefact is precisely the way in which it has been preserved over time... let me explain.
It is clear that a metal object, which spends centuries buried in the earth, or closed in a humid environment in contact with wet walls, etc. or buried in a grave to rot with its owner... it certainly has a high probability of ending up corroded by rust and oxide.
On the contrary, the more protected he remains from these elements, the better his chances of remaining "healthy" are.

Many of the swords and armor we see in museums, in excellent condition, are all post 15th century. Therefore they are most likely stored in better "protected" environments, perhaps indoors in trunks or wardrobes, in sword scabbard, or even simply protected with burnishing systems or superficial protective applications.
For example, mails (excluding those buried or found in rivers and mud fields), I imagine easily stored in closed containers, like normal clothes (but much more resistant).
In fact, all those with serious rust and corrosion encrustations clearly have been in contact with humid agents for a long time, and therefore kept uncovered, unprotected and so on.

I believe that many examples prior to the 15th century, if not reused in subsequent centuries or dismembered for garments suitable for Renaissance military fashions, were practically "abandoned" to themselves... even simply kept in unsuitable places and not cleaned/handled for centuries.

[Jim McDougall]

While I think Roger will answer Patricks question better, I just read a little on the subject of corrosion etc. with mail.

One of the key factors may have been the quality of the material, iron or steel, and the degree of proper processing. Poorly forged or poor quality material would seem more likely to encounter corrosion and compromise.

Good question though, how does mail remain in such good condition.
One thing about swords which are from old collections that have been displayed seem to have corroded more on the surface exposed due to dust accumulation absorbing moisture, while the reverse not getting as much dust was less exposed to dust and moisture. That was one suggestion I once heard.

Some mail may have been case hardened, thus less vulnerable.

I saw some detail on plating rings with brass or bronze as mentioned in post earlier, with the term electroplating....which seems kind of a modern process.

[RogerFox]

Yes Jim, the exposure theroy is in some way part of my argument... an object kept still for decades in the same position, will suffer different range of oxidation, dust and rust, depending on the sides exposed. Sure, it sound really appropriate.

There is also another thing to consider.. most of the well preserved items we can see today, weapons, armors and so on... kept their overall good conditions expecially thanks to the fact that they were "family collections". So they came out from quite "protected" situations... on the contrary, many corroded items were found in outdoor enviroments, such as graves, battleflieds and so on.
This is a situation we can see even on most recent items such WW2 helmets, bayonettes and others.

The hardening of late medieval weapons and armors is for sure a good point for the preservation, but i think that the main ruining process is caused by the real place where the items were left for centuries.

Note: once an expert told me that technically there is no "iron items" (speaking about medieval times) but they are all different level of steel... thats because the iron is in fact the mineral itself

[Teisani]

Originally Posted by RogerFox

Note: once an expert told me that technically there is no "iron items" (speaking about medieval times) but they are all different level of steel... thats because the iron is in fact the mineral itself

That's generally true today as well. It is very difficult, even today, to purify iron to the point that it shows its true face. That's due to carbon, even in remarkably low concentrations, being able to modify ferritic iron's mechanical properties.

[Victrix]

I think I read somewhere that the mail was cleaned by scrubbing it in sand. Would make sense.

[awdaniec666]

Thanks for replying. Another point that came to my mind reading your toughts is the worth of an item which surely would have an impact on the treatment it received from its owners. Roger, do you happen to know what a mail shirt would have cost in the late 16th century? It would be interesting to compare to swords. In Styria a Dusegge was 1,5 Gulden, a Hungarian Pallasch 2 Gulden and a Zweihänder was 6 Gulden. Maybe a mail shirt was generally much more expensive and better to store which gave it an obvious benefit for "survival" in comparison to rigid and long swords. A Gulden by the way was about 0,5 to 0,75 Ounces of silver in the HRR of the 16th century.

[Interested Party]

Originally Posted by awdaniec666

In Styria a Dusegge was 1,5 Gulden, a Hungarian Pallasch 2 Gulden and a Zweihänder was 6 Gulden. Maybe a mail shirt was generally much more expensive and better to store which gave it an obvious benefit for "survival" in comparison to rigid and long swords. A Gulden by the way was about 0,5 to 0,75 Ounces of silver in the HRR of the 16th century.

Thank you! That is fantastic information. At this time in central Europe silver seems much more valuable than now. Maybe the basis of silver's value is the amount of human labor it takes to acquire it. Thus, making it much less of a stable medium of exchange over time than generally thought. Though if you think of the current pay for a black smith in an underdeveloped country the price you gave in silver still line up.

[RogerFox]

Originally Posted by awdaniec666

Thanks for replying. Another point that came to my mind reading your toughts is the worth of an item which surely would have an impact on the treatment it received from its owners. Roger, do you happen to know what a mail shirt would have cost in the late 16th century? It would be interesting to compare to swords. In Styria a Dusegge was 1,5 Gulden, a Hungarian Pallasch 2 Gulden and a Zweihänder was 6 Gulden. Maybe a mail shirt was generally much more expensive and better to store which gave it an obvious benefit for "survival" in comparison to rigid and long swords. A Gulden by the way was about 0,5 to 0,75 Ounces of silver in the HRR of the 16th century.

It's a great topic and I have to admit that I don't know it in detail. Considering the vastness of interpretations that this question contains (In which part of the world? What level of quality? Massive production or specific pieces? and so on...) I intend to investigate further

[RogerFox]

Originally Posted by Victrix

I think I read somewhere that the mail was cleaned by scrubbing it in sand. Would make sense.

That is true. Sand tumbling was (is) a good way to overall clean the mail pieces, but it works mostly just for superficial oxidation... less effective for deep rust patina and corrosion.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

One thing about swords which are from old collections that have been displayed seem to have corroded more on the surface exposed due to dust accumulation absorbing moisture, while the reverse not getting as much dust was less exposed to dust and moisture. That was one suggestion I once heard...

Far from intending to go off topic, but this is indeed a subject rather tempting to raise.
I live less than a mile away from the salty Atlantic coast, and every time i pick up an old sword (or gun) from the walls for whatever reason, i am horrified with how fast topic rust invades the upper areas. Yes, only the upper areas. Whatever recipe of moister and dust creates in the air above and then falls down for assault on top of them.



.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Far from intending to go off topic, but this is indeed a subject rather tempting to raise.
I live less than a mile away from the salty Atlantic coast, and every time i pick up an old sword (or gun) from the walls for whatever reason, i am horrified with how fast topic rust invades the upper areas. Yes, only the upper areas. Whatever recipe of moister and dust creates in the air above and then falls down for assault on top of them.



.

Well noted Fernando. that was the term I was looking for ,'topical' rust.
I first came across this apparently consistent phenomenon when reading of arms and armor which resided over long periods as funerary relics in churches' tombs.
Not at all off topic, as one topic queried here has been the variation in the condition of period mail and what might cause some to be better preserved than others.
It is well known in 'arms forensics' that surprisingly some swords found in river beds or in many cases even ocean deposits where silt is so compacted, they are in better condition than those deposited in earth.
This has to do with goethite ? mineral reactions from within the metal.
Uh, that is the extent of my empirical scientific knowledge on this.

I had an old cannonball that sat in my desk for many years. One day it literally disintegrated into a heap of ferric residue, literally having corroded from within! despite it being static for so many years.
This returns to the possible levels or degree of purity ? of the iron used in certain instances, where weapons and armor were more 'worked'..perhaps.

[Jim McDougall]

Roger, again thank you.
I agree any sort of maintenance using various material or protective substances would lend to the durability and resilience of the component metal. It seems there was mention of gilding etc. as protective, not to mention of course decorative attraction, in the case of high station individuals.

In "Arms and Armor of the Conquistadors 1492-1600" (Walter Karcheski, 1990, p.3, the famed conquistador Hernando Cortes was described at the time of his attack on Cibola (1540), as "gilded and glittered" in his armor. Naturally this may have been a plate cuirass given his rank, while at large the armor worn by other ranks was mostly mail, with occasional plate components.

While mail was quickly phasing out in Europe to plate components, it remained in use in the America's well through the 17th c.

Here in Texas, we have the enduring legend of 'Chief Iron Shirt', the Comanche chief who was thought to be supernatural as he seemed impervious to bullets.
It seems he had worn an old shirt of mail inherited from his father, also a Comanche chief who had acquired this apparently in some manner from Spanish means. He was apparently called 'chief cota de mailla' by the local Spanish for the iron shirt he wore.

Interestingly the chief I am speaking of, the son, was named Puhihwikwasu'u
(=brass man, in Comanche), bringing to mind the possible presence of brass components perhaps in the 'shirt'.

In 1858, in battle in the Red River regions of North Texas, his luck ran out.
Apparently the mail was effective against light weapon fire, however it was no match for the 'buffalo gun' of one of Ford's Texas Rangers, and he was killed.
Unfortunately his body was not recovered, though parts of the mail were taken as souvenirs. I am not aware of any of those surviving.

Just illustrating some colorful aspects of old mail in other contexts. In the Sudan during the campaigns with the British in late 1890s, the native warriors in many cases were wearing mail which was often locally made.
While the soldiers carried away literally tons of souvenirs, swords, spear heads, etc.........the mail was left behind.........too heavy.

[RogerFox]

Veru cool story abput the Chief Comanche!! The story of a coat of mail inherited from ancestors seems perfectly legitimate.

About the Sudan mails, by now all the story came out. It is a fact that they used to wear indo/persian (sometime European) riveted mail... or self producted butted mail. I wonder what kind of treasure we lost in those regions, left behind by soldiers and people.


-

[fernando]

Members are recommended to reduce the size of each quotation to the part of the texts they wish to emphasize !



.