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

[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.

[Jim McDougall]

Roger, thank you so much for so comprehensively fielding all of these questions, as well as opening this thread!

With regard to the queries on whether the character of the metal used in mail might have been a key factor in whether it was badly deteriorated by corrosion or survived in relatively sound condition:

One reference I found suggested 'case hardening' . I have little metallurgical knowledge...what exactly is this and does such process have any part in early mail production?
On that same note....the mention of 'electroplating' , which seems to be some sort of applying brass or bronze type metal in coating the rings to prevent corrosion. ......is that term correct? seems too modern.

I found notes suggesting that often the mail was oiled or 'waxed' between usage.

I had heard or mail being cleaned by working it in sand and some sort of agent (urine? was suggested) to remove rust and stabilize the metal.
This of course must have been some sort of rudimentary maintenance in the field.
It would seem that lack of proper care was an issue in the expeditions to the New World and the weaponry and equipment used by the men, who were not necessarily military and using self supplied items. An individual not well initiated in such matters using some old mail he may have acquired from various means would likely not be attuned to such protocols

These situations I think led to the ultimate adoption of leather armor by the Spaniards as better protection from the deadly arrows, which would often easily penetrate mail, especially with compromised metal rings.

[Victrix]

Originally Posted by Interested Party

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.

Today half the production of silver is as a byproduct in the mining of zinc, lead and copper. So I guess there is sometimes excess supply of the metal. Although generally regarded as a precious metal, it also has industrial use making demand for the metal more cyclical than gold. A lot of the demand for gold comes from central banks who hold it as part of their foreign currency reserves. Silver is appreciated for its beauty in jewelry and decoration, but a problem is that it oxidates which requires labour intensive regular polishing. All this means the price of silver today is notoriously more volatile than gold.

[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 !



.

[awdaniec666]

Found something interesting regarding rust on mail on a Wikipedia site in German.

"Rost ist für Kettenrüstungen kaum ein Problem, wenn sie regelmäßig getragen und sorgfältig gelagert werden. Nach Auskunft des Experimentalarchäologen Marcus Junkelmann, der viele Erfahrungen mit Nachbauten römischer Kettenpanzer sammelte, reiben die Ringe bei Bewegungen des Trägers unablässig aneinander und scheuern so den Rost ab. Bei ständigem Tragen ist nicht einmal Einölen erforderlich, selbst bei nassem Wetter und sogar beim Einsatz im Wasser. Lediglich ein intensiver schwarzer Eisenabrieb ist festzustellen. Bei unsachgemäßer Lagerung kann ein unbenutzter Panzer aber schnell zu einem Klumpen zusammenrosten, verschiedene Beispiele sind aus archäologischen Funden erhalten."

Translation:

"Rust is hardly a problem for chain armour if it is worn regularly and stored carefully. According to the experimental archaeologist Marcus Junkelmann, who has gained a great deal of experience with replicas of Roman chain armour, the rings rub against each other constantly when the wearer moves, thus rubbing off the rust. With constant wear, oiling is not even necessary, even in wet weather and even when used in water. Only an intensive black iron abrasion is noticeable. If stored improperly, however, an unused armour can quickly rust together into a lump; various examples have been preserved from archaeological finds."

Source: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketten...ng#Herstellung