We nead a Chainmail penetration test!

[D. Tiller]

I've been thinking about minimum and maximum penitration and its relation to bow weight with warbows. I've read and been a part of a lot of discusions on bow weight vs penetration of armor and what was the minimal weight necesary to actually do this at military distances with a warbow durring the beginning of its use. I propose we do a test and find out what is the minimum weight of both bow and arrow to penitrate chainmail at 50, 100 and 200 yards.

I think such tests should be done with yew bows pulling in weights from 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110 and 120 pounds weight and shooting shafts 3/8ths inch and 1/2 inch in diameter with long bodkin points.  I believe such a test would allow us to determine the lightest weight of bow usable during the nasence of the warbow.

Now all we have to do is find someone who has some chainmail to test on and people with bows in these weight ranges. Whos up for the challenge? Me I only have one 60# bow in yew.

Does anyone know what early shaft diameters where during the birth of the warbow? I would think they were actually smaller than 1/2 inch in diameter.

[Loki]

60-80lb Bows are going to struggle with 1/2 shafts,i loosed a livery arrow out of my 75lb (More like 70lb now) Bow and the results werent very impressive  ,arrow was far too heavy for me.
This test would allso do for testing accuracy,i presume the Mail is going to be a Hauberk? or Hauberk size? as you know D.Tiller all the relevant undergarments will have to be included to get a accurate discription of the penetration.Then there's the steel used for the armour,can you remember the discussions on the WB forum  ,jeez....

[Len]

Hi guys, if your'e talking Norman era then you dont need any padding as there is no evidence for akertons before the mid 12th C. If you're talking about the time of around edward the 1st then you need an arrow that will penertrate the maille plus akerton and also about this time the coat-of-plates was starting to appear so I think the early warbows and arrows couldnt have been much lighter then the Mary Rose ones. However I have seen a 60lb bow destroy maille without paddind at 20 metres.

[mnewcomb59]

Just a quick question.. Why yew bows? I thought we all agreed that every wood is equal, just have to design it right. I know that would disqualify some woods that need to be made flat and thin from being a "warbow", but why couldn't you do the tests with ipe, massaranduba or another dense wood that has been proven to withstand the 5:8 ratio?

[sagitarius boemoru]

There is indirect evidence of padding worn under chainmail in the norman era. It exists in the form of written account. Anybody cares to post first crusade erata on "Franks" (Normans).
Its either description of one of muslim writers (or perhaps even in the description of normans by Anna Komnena) about "Franks marching through the hail of arrows and not paying any heed to many arrows sticking out of their armour resembling the form of hedgehog" - this is hardly possible without a form of padded thick undergarment.

Also in antic warfare was known "subarmalis" garment - which is preciselly this. Medieval warfare in europe stands  on roman legs. So think. It was known, then it dissapeared and then again magickaly appeared? Hardly. (Taking in consideration continuous use of chainmail since late roman iron age in europe.)


Also - regarding metalography - everytime I get into discussion with one of armour guys about chainmails, they start to rant about how many different "styles" of chainmail exists and how "wrought iron" is superior to that and that....
It does not bear much significance. The chainmail is not constructed to stop piercing damage. Its mesh. Look on the development of spear since migration period through the viking age till 11. century. Does the bell rings? That is the reason everybody used such big shield in the time when chainmail was cutting edge of armour technology.

There is also written accounts of warriors withstanding large number of cutting and smashing blows (Vilem of Kounic took over 100 hits during the battle at Lodenice in 11. century - as counted on his completelly destroyed fox fur coat - the battle itself took place in freezing winter - he was without any wound and he established a church upon his return home) which is not possible without padded undergarment. (Kosmas chronicle)


Such a test does not prove anything in terms how light "warbows" were. D. Tiller - you are just triing to lower the treshold to pass into warbow teritory, but it does not work that way.

When in war you want to do 2 things
1) beat the armour
2) outdistance the enemy

Even if 1) is achieved you still want to shoot over larger distance than enemy archer and also the 1) has to occur with reasonable regularity. Nobody deploys ineffective weapon and stays successfull for long time. This trigers arms race very well.

There are at least 2 examples of 11. century bows which are well over 100# in the cultural area we are speaking of and lots of others at least in 80# range.
Also we have written account in heimskringla (excellently versed actually) of shooting through chainmail (and also that SHIELD is the protection against arrow, not chainmail.


Anyway


“German Infantry Warrior, 1130-1140”. Abteikirche von Andlau im Elsaß.


David and Golias , Master from Tahul 12. century

So unless this sort of undergarment appeared by miracle between AD 1095 and 1150.......Go figure.

Objectives of this test is ultimatelly flaved. It "proves" nothing Also its obvious as Loki pointed out that 70# and 120#  would need different arrow.

J.


(This is for both Len and Loki)

[sagitarius boemoru]

When testing anything with warbows, you have to start with what we know and extrapolate from that and not the other way.


Chris -  in any hypotetical cause it has to be yew, since all bows of interest were yew. Test with anything else is not conclusive. There was no Ipe in europe in 14. century.

Whitewood bow would be O.K. though not a single one survived and I m inclined to believe, they did not looked the same as their yew counterparts.


J.

[sagitarius boemoru]

Since I m evil as usually, I ll ask a different question.

What is objective not that of the test, but the one upon which you decide that the setup is correct or not?
Ultimatelly 1/2´´ shaft shot from 75# is lazy bitch, but I m certain it will pierce chainmail. Then....What will actually be conclusive.


J.

[Len]

Show me the evidence of Romans wearing padded armour or Vikings/Saxons for that matter and as for the crusaders walking thru arrows they were facing lighter arrows then English archers used. The stone carving is the earlist evidence of a padded garment I've seen but is still 12th C. During the 111 crusade Richard put felt or padded garments over his mens armour to stop arrows but this was late 12th C. and once again against lighter arrows.

[Len]

And by the way dont quote the guy who withstood 100 blows as you said he was wearing a fox fur coat over his maille.

[sagitarius boemoru]

"Show me the evidence of Romans wearing padded armour"

- the word "subarmalis" is latin. Read Renatus or any other military writer of roman age.

http://www.legionxxiv.org/lrgsubmaralis/
http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Subarmalis

"or Vikings/Saxons  for that matter"

- Viking warfare  is directly conected to late roman iron age. Viking sword is Spatha for the sake! There is again written account on "moose hide jackets" in Heimskringla.

"and as for the crusaders walking thru arrows they were facing lighter arrows then English archers used. "

- NON SEQUITUR. Doesnt matter how heavy were the arrows. I know they were light, I even did not considered it to be important.
one nice logical fallacy.
If the arrow is through chainmail enough to stick so that it resembles hedgehog spike and its your body, not padded garment its sticking out, you wont be marching comfortably and certainly not for long.


Go, find  Kosmas chronicle. This high ranked monk left behind several description of fights with spectacular death of the hero in the arrowstorm. (Detrisek of Buzu)
The description again indirectly points out use of chainmail with some kind of thick undergrament.

It does not need to be "aketon" as the price of any fabric was still high in early medieval age, but it can be thick tunic or coat made of felt (processed wool).


"And by the way dont quote the guy who withstood 100 blows as you said he was wearing a fox fur coat over his maille."

-He wore fox fur coat, because the battle took a place on frozen river. It is written, that mortality on wounds was extremelly high as the wounded froze to death before any help could be brought to them. Fox fur has about protective value as early morning mist when it comes to sharp edged weapons such as swords. Its evident that he used coat because he was cold, not as aditionall protection over mail.

What I m doing here. Longbowman advocating armour....


Your style of writing points out a kid (And by the way), I was recently asked by admin not to chew our 12 years old memebers..But I cannot help it, I m evil person.


J.

[Yeomanbowman]

Just a quick question.. Why yew bows? I thought we all agreed that every wood is equal, just have to design it right. I know that would disqualify some woods that need to be made flat and thin from being a "warbow", but why couldn't you do the tests with ipe, massaranduba or another dense wood that has been proven to withstand the 5:8 ratio?

If non period woods are used it just adds an unnecessary variable that could negate the validity of any results gained.  It would be hard enough to get mail that is be riveted and from iron let alone use different wood.
It would give some indication but let's not 'tinker' with history if there really is no need.
Jeremy

[Len]

A felt or woolen tunic does not constitute padded armour in the sense we were talking about and I stand by my comments that if testing against pre mid 12thC maille then you dont need to construt specfic padded armour for the test. If you think I write like a child then next time I'll try to not talk down to you

[Rod]

Is this a warbow topic or an English yew bow topic? I will remind you that serious warbows 120lb to 150lb average draw weight for infantry, 90lb to 120lb average draw weight for horseback use, have been used by other cultures.
But who else is presentlly shooting war bow weights? On that basis you might be stuck with The English bow for the time being.
I will also offer the thhought that with properly made maille and the correct quality of supporting garments, the type of head used is also a factor not to be disregarded.
When you shoot at something that represents a properly made aketon over maille it's very different from shooting at maille alone.
Also, penetration. even with the correct head will vary according to the support beneath the garments.
For example, compare penetration of padding on a hard straw boss with penetration on a foam layered field boss.
To get representative results, you are going to have to start dressing up some pig carcasses in the appropriate attire.
FWIW
Rod.

[sagitarius boemoru]

"A felt or woolen tunic does not constitute padded armour in the sense we were talking about"

- It serves the same purpose. Think about 1/2´´ thick felt or more. This is not just "woolen tunic".  I find interesting what it can be made with proper rhetoric. Padded chainmail undergarment is not armour of itself. In some parts it actually cannot be thick (arms, ellbows) otherwise the mobility of combatant is severely impaired. Various later sources prescribe how much stuffing shall be used for aketons for them to be considered of good quality and the weights of the quill arent astonishingly high particulary if you take in consideration, that these garments been as long as knee lenght.


"I stand by my comments that if testing against pre mid 12thC maille then you dont need to construt specfic padded armour for the test"

- Stand where you want to. I heard this argument before and it is still stupid. Yes there is no pictorial or direct written evidence. This is hovever also because of heavy stylisation of pictures in the time we are speaking of.
Since romans aparently used it, later in medieval time it was sure used and we have battle records supporting use of padding under chainmail, the assumption they used it is well suported. It is an assumption, but educated one.

You basically place a birth of padded undergarment for chainmail into 12. century and that is a little too bold for my taste.

Sure you must read "The vikings" web often. 

J.

[Heiner]

Here's more sources for the ahketon between 900 and 1030:

1.) Wargames ResearchGroup Publication, 2nd edition, 1980
Saint Olaf´s Saga records some huscarls wearing jerkins at the battle of Stiklestad in 1030; these were made of reindeer hide and we are told "that no weapon could cut or pierce them any more than they were armour of ring mail, nor even so much"

2.) Osprey Warrior Series 3 (Viking Hersir)
Sturluson, in the Heimskringla, mentions the gift of 13 body armours of reindeer hide to King Olaf the Saint.

3.) Ekkehardi IV (Kap 51), St. Galler Klostergeschichten (Casus sancti Galli) (Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi LXXV.).Hannover 2002. ISBN 3-7752-5475-7
“As in the year 926 news of the Hungary approaching the monastery St. Gallen spread, the abbott at that time, Engilbert, proved guidance qualities: He ordered an escape castle to be build and weapons and shieds to be improvised. Then he put on a armour under its Kukulle and instructed its brothers to do it equal to him. Thus they made armour from felt materials.”

4.) Byzantinische Waffen, Taxiarchis G. Kolias, Verlag der östereichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien 1988, ISBN 3-7001-1471-0
“Beside armamanet, which (...), could cinsist of leather or horn and was alternatively worn to those of iron, there were such strong garbs from felt or wadded, quilted material, which likewise served as armament. (...) Those (Greek word) were thus nothing else as strengthened felt dresses or felt covers, which often also could could withstand a pass or a blow as well. (...) should reach only up to the knees. They had short broad sleeves, (...) they were compound from a mixture from cotton and (obviously inferior) silk, a connection, which was particularly resistant probably particularly because of their thickness. They might have been felted, quilted or wadded.”
This is to be taken from the Tactica (approx. 900) and from further Byzantine works for war guidance.

Credits go to Henry Skodell who researched this when composing the armoury-kitguide for the Franco-Flemish-Contingent.

Sincerely,
Heiner