The Hauberk from Montenegro - How authentic is it?
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 06. 2024
- Likely this is the only surviving hauberk with an attached coif. How is the coif attached? And from what time is it? Let's go to Montenegro and find out.
Discover more about Ironskin:
www.ironskin.com/
Read a great book about medieval armor:
geni.us/NudBBg
Join the ranks of my supporters:
/ ironskin - Věda a technologie
Really interesting, thanks.
That mail kind of has the drip with the colors.
this is wonderful! I had no idea chainmail had so much in common with knitting
Will there be a part 2? I would love to see the conclusion of your examination.
I hope to visit it again one day to be able to tell you more about the coif and also the other body-parts of the armor.
@@Ironskin
The rings appear more round than flattened.
Is this correct?
Also how does this compare to the examples you show on your website?
Thank you
Superb! I am both surprised the museum allowed this work, and upset they didn't allow the hauberk to be placed on a table for the work to be done.
I'm as surprised as you. Since I was mainly looking at the top, the missing table wasn't a problem.
@@Ironskin A table would have allowed the stress of the weight to be removed. Museums don't often remove artifacts from their displays or mounts. It is a rare opportunity, at any time. Thanks for sharing.
The configuration of the coif is something that reminds me greatly of one of the reconstructions you posted on instagram. Double ventail, hooked inside and outside. The top of the coif, however, is simpler for the artisan (just a regular sheat of mail, pretty much) but feels like it wouldn't be very safe for the wearer, unless the the ends of it were actually overlapping to some extent. Still, very interesting as perhaps the oldest surviving medieval hauberk
Fantastic work. Well done.
This is so interesting! Lovely video and great explanations. It's so cool you were able to look closer at a piece like this and really get to interact with it! Wonderful to watch, well done. :)
Awesome bro. Great work. I look forward to part two if we are lucky enough
So interesting! Well done!
Please brother, make more videos. I've been waiting for a year to see you make wire from scrap metal, and see you make mail from it.
You're my motivation, mate! Yes, I should upload more frequently. For the wire making I'm getting my hands on iron that actually comes close to medieval iron in it's material properties. It took a while to find that. It will still take long to make the video! I hope you can get over it with my Insta posts in the meantime. :)
Thank you for this interesting video. It is a very spectacular mail artefact. It gave me joy to see that you are using the filling in method (on which I wrote a paper) to analyse the coat and coif. Best wishes, Martijn A. Wijnhoven
I'm feeling honored to have you commenting here! :) I'm so much looking forward to read your book "European Mail Armour" coming in December. I have with great interest read most of your ground-breaking publications. Not sure wheter I read about the filling-in method or came up with it. Sounds like something to worthy to read now while passing the waiting time.
@@Ironskin I hope you like the book. It is the culmination of 10 years of research. Again congratulations on your very interesting video. Do not hesitate to contact me if you want to. Best wishes
I am from Montenegro and those a**holes didn't allow me 10-12 years ago to examine one hauberk with very strange rings. You could not see any ring with rivets and all rings looked like tin or lead covered. I think it was turkish. And I tried to persuade them to allow me to check some arrow heads without success. Montenegro is worst for it's own citizens :(
I'm feeling with you. :/
Maybe from king Vladimir time?
Tinned links are often encountered -- rust prevention.
Very impressive video
Wonderfull, absolutely fascinating.
Very interesting video. I hope you'll make some more soon. Have you ever investigated how links might be 'fire welded'? I also wonder if wrought iron mail was ever case hardened, either by heating with powdered charcoal in a sealed container, or simply quenching it in oil.
Fascinating stuff Sebastian. You got to examine it for real, that is wonderful. I agree with your conclusions. Remarkable that the Vimose armpit looks identical! This surely is very possibly a quite old hauberk. When I think of the lack of tailoring or it’s being simple and primitive, I wonder then about the top of the head. Perhaps a really simple seam front to back, no reduction rings. Or as in some later Eastern mail a small iron disk in the crown? Usually these have attaching rings which would look different. I found myself fingers itching to add more blue rings to fill in all the small holes!😁 Well done.
Thank you for sharing your view on it. Fingers are indeed itching a lot. It needs to be continued. There is so much more to learn from it.
i was riveted to the screen
That must have been real cool to see
Du hast das einzig richtige gemacht und bist hingefahren um es aus erster Hand zu sehen.
Very interesting, thank you for this video. Just a little note about the audio for future videos: the left channel sounds good but the right is filled with sounds of something bumping into the microphone and sounds very loud and distracting on headphones. It would have been easy to remove the right channel and make it mono.
Thank you for that valuable hint! :)
Can you please make a video about different mail Bishop's mantles? 🙏
This type of mail armour looks really cool and has a lot of variations which are not described in the Internet, while mail shirts are widely exposed and explained. So this theme might become very profitable due to the lack of information (particularly about mail mantles of the second half of XVI century when it became the only one piece of armour of light cavalry)
Also, they have some specific types of rings connections (at least the way I see them, they are not as easy as an usual mail hauberk)
Hope You will see my comment
Have a nice day!
Hey, that's an excellent idea! Now it's on my list of videos to make. :)
@@Ironskin thanks!
Whole-row tapering/reduction on a sleeve from elbow down to wrist is expected tailoring. It reduces weight there which is vital for combat, and it removes mail's tendency to flop about, exactly where you don't want it doing that.
Short to half sleeves have less of a problem that way, and you don't have to expand for the elbow.
Excellent presentation! Obverse and reverse vents at the hem of the coat for use in the saddle and alternating rows of riveted and solid rings are typically found on Indian and some Persian coats. Given the Ottoman presence in the Balkans, this may be a valid consideration.
Bartok romanian folk dances there in the background, sweet.
I love integral coifs on hauberks
so, when we will get a reconstruction video? XD
That's the right spirit. :D
Ma maman s'est demandé pendant longtemps comment les armuriers médiévaux faisaient pour tricoter le fil de fer !🤣😅😄
Круто! Спасибо большое.
Hi! Is there a publication of it?
Not yet, but we're in the process of writing it.
@@Ironskin looking forward to it! 😍
I'lld say that it's a typical short sleeve hauberk from the 12th century.
Hmm... So it has the same pattern where the riveted links on the front side are meeting the solid links on the back side, like the Roman and Germanic haubergons constructed in the coptic fashion (Vimose, Thorsberg, Gammertingen, Arbeia, etc. etc.)?
Also, how do you know it's fire welded? Normally that takes an X-Ray to determine for certain due to oxidation. A lot of classical and late Roman hauberks have that issue, where upon initial examination the authors wrote "butted" or "welded" but when actually scientifically examined by Schmidt, Wijnhoven, etc. they clearly were closed-die forged.
About that riveted rings meeting solid rings at the side: I tried to analize it from the pictures in hintseight. It seems that's not the case. The rows rather go all the way around the torso. But I can't be sure. The riveted and solid rings are difficult to distinguish.
About the fire-welding: That's only an educated speculation. Nicholas Checksfield explained me what to look for and we were discussing rings on pictures. Sometimes you can see lines that could be a poor weld-connection which is partly coming undone.
@@Ironskin if it doesn't occur often that could be an indication of a repair link from the lifetime of the shirt?
When do welded links first appear? I know they're not evidenced during Classical or Late Antiquity.
The different-size rings are bugging me hahaha. It makes little sense for a mail-maker - even a low-end one - to make his rings on different-sized mandrels. That would really complicate things by needing extra tools, different punches or drifts, different rivets, and so on. I know that we can only make wild guesses at this time, but did there seem to be a functional purpose to them (such as tightening the weave or assisting the few bits of tailoring), or were they maybe repairs made during the working lifetime of the armour?
I think there is one hypothetical manufactoring-process that might point into the right directing to answer this question: Step 1: You coil a spiral on a mandrel. Step 2: You cut rings without overlap. Step 3: You bend the ends of a ring to create an overlap. This can lead to rings of varying size.
With late medieval (proto)industry all those things likely wouldn't be made by one guy at all.
Specialization and division of roles into chain of succeeding processes was normal.
It could be that some craftsman workshop was importing all the rings they could find nearby, quickly, for whatever reason.
@@lscibor that’s an interesting point. I’ve definitely assumed that mail rings were coiled and shaped in the workshop which assembled the armour, but none of the images of mailmakers shows mandrels for coiling rings - only tools for assembling the shirts and closing riveted rings.
Given the roughness of this piece it is absolutely possible that it could have been hastily assembled using different rings. I suppose that we’d need a close examination of tooling marks to help look Fortier into that (if the condition of any of the rings still allows that).
What a fascinating shirt.
I've seen shirts with different sizes of rings. These can be the result of a number of factors.
1. Deliberate use of smaller, heavier, or lighter rings to affect the weave for weight, density, or defense.
2. Repairs made with whatever rings are available.
3. Assembly of pre-made fabric into finished armors in another shop.
4. Chintzy workmanship, where no usable ring is discarded, regardless of quality.
I believe the rivets would stay the same through a range of link diameters.
Differentiated diameters have their uses, either in using lighter wire for saving weight in less exposed places, and the very aesthetic use of undersized links to make expansions vanish altogether into the weave; a full size link in an expansion leaves a distinctive little dip in the next linkrow down. Doesn't impair the mail's function, either way.
Hand cutting my links, I find a few of them come out over- or under-sized by the time I have gotten a correct overlap into the link. My needlenose pliers serve as a quick Go/No Go gauge for finished diameters; I cull out the wrong-sized links for use elsewhere. Apart from size, they're perfectly good AFAIK.
Sehr interessant. Ich schlage Vor, dass Du dir die Proportionen eines geeigneten Puppenkopfs mit einer Haube holst und anbringst, das könnte vielleicht einen Näherungsweisen Aufschluss über die passende Anordnung der Flicken deuten.
Anmerkung zu den Ringen am Unterarm. Das kann Reibung sein, aber auch vielleicht auch zusätzlich stärkere Belastung durch Rost, weil gerade dort man a) schwitzt und die Ringe eingeklemmt sind, daher könnten die leichter aufrauhen und eher ausdünnen. Es ist aber schwer zu sagen welchen Belastungen es ausgesetzt war. Dazu ist alles was an verfügbarer Vorgeschichte greifbar ist in Beziehung zum Hemd gesetzt werden. Lagerungsschäden inklusive.
Die Ringe sind noch sehr gut erhalten... Aufgrund der Bauart ist das schon gewissenhaft gebaut worden, wer daran arbeitete hat also das nicht zum ersten mal gemacht. Die Reperaturen (sofern ich das richtig gesehen habe, wenn es keine Fäden waren) waren entweder in aller Eile gemacht oder von Halbwissern verbessert worden.
Schade das ausgerechnet der Scheitel den Geist aufegegeben hat. Vielleicht aber auch zum Vorteil! Kannst du eventuell ein Stoffimitat (T-Shit + angenähte Haube) dir organisieren und die entsprechenden Flicken / Bruchstellen aufzeichnen? Über diesen Weg ist es vielleicht möglich zurückzuschließen, wo die "Brüche" Verlaufen und wie die Glieder unter dem Gewicht / Verarbeitung nachgegeben haben. Das würde vielleicht folgendes zeigen: a) wo die Verarbeitung Qualitativ hochwertig war. b) Wo aufgrund großer Dynamik eventuelle Schäden zu erwarten sind. c) Wie die Verarbeitung speziellen Problemstellen begegnet ist (Achseln, Hals, Ellenbogen... alles wo viel Bewegung ist). d) Wie das Gewicht verteilt wurde (Taillierung, Abnehmer, Trötnähte... )
Anhand der Proportionen kannst du ja versuchen abzuschätzen wie groß der Träger war unter gewissen unterkleidungen. Also Tunika, Gambeson usw.
Wurde vielleicht eine Hirnhaube darunter getragen?
Hast du einen Ring in zu einer metallurigischen Analyse geben können? Die Zusammensetzung könnte auf die Verarbeitung schließen lassen.
Eine Mutmaßung: Die Schulterseiten muten belastet an, ich vermute, dass die Haube in einer Form gewickelt und auch gleichzeitig an der unterseite der linken und rechten Schulter-Hals-Sektion vielleicht verbunden wurde, die Belastung der Haube wurde vielleicht so versucht umzuleiten, damit sie sich nicht wieder loslöst oder eventuelle Schließen oder Schließmechanismen übermäßig belastet. Das Hauptgewicht ist wohl an diesen Stellen gewesen, weil sie möglichweise das Gewicht gegen eine enge Passform verteidigt haben. Somit sind diese innenseitigen Verbindungen aus meiner Sicht mögliche Pfade die Belastung vor den Kopf herumzuführen, damit einerseits die Passform enger sein kann und mehr Gewicht nach vorne Kommt, dass dem Gewicht der Haube nach hinten die Waage hält. Es wäre zu schön, das mal näher betrachten zu können um das besser zu beurteilen.
Im Übrigen war ein Bautechnischer Ansatz einer Haube meinerseits mit ähnlichen Gedanken behaftet. Es sollte ein Kompromiss zwischen einer engen Passform entstehen und auch auf und abziehbar sein. Inwiefern die ineinander verschränke Verknüpfung dazu beitrug ist hier experiementell rauszufinden. Eine möglichst glatte Oberfläche ist wünschenswert, die Fließrichtung der Ketten weißt auf eine erwartung von Schnitten von oben hin. Wenn also das Stück länger ist, kann es möglicherweise sein, dass es insgesamt über den Kopf geht und vorne wieder verbunden werden könnte. Strategisch macht eine Befestigung an den Schultern Sinn, da einerseits das Gewicht des Hemds vom Kettenhemd hochgezogen wird und einen besseren Tragekompfor bietet und das Hemd sich etwas auf den Kopf spannt, wenn man das Vorderteil innenseitig geschickt befestigt, kann man bei einem Hochziehen der Haube so vielleicht schon den Kopf in Stahl hüllen... schwer zu beschreiben was gerade in meinem Kopf passiert während ich mir das ansehe.
Ich teile deine Überraschung, dass die Haube sich nicht zu einem eizelnen Ring oben abschließt.
Danke! Und herzlichen glückwunsch ein solches Exemplar zu bewundern! :3
Ich würde mich sehr über weiterführende Informationen freuen und werde erwartungsvoll auf der Lauer liegen! :)
Wow! Danke für deine Einschätzung und die vielen Tipps! Du scheinst auf dem Gebiet sehr kompetent zu sein. Ich denke die Haube ist am Nacken eingerissen, weil da die Ringe auch wie du sagst, durch Schweiß und Reibung mehr ausgedünnt wurden und weil sie da in modernen Zeiten angepackt wurde und das Eigengewicht des Hauberks nicht tragen konnte. Die Ringe metallurgisch zu untersuchen ist auf jedem Fall ein guter Plan für die Zukunft. Ich werd auch noch etwas in geschriebener Form dazu rausbringen. Es tun sich mehr Fragen auf als Antworten :D
@@Ironskin Absolut! Übrigens hab ich dich mal besucht und dir mein langarm / knielanges Hemd gezeigt! ;3
Nur damit du weißt wer hinter dem Geschreibsel steck! ^^
Danke für's wertschätzen! :3
How did you get the chance to handle the piece?
It was a couple of emails and phone calls with the museum and I could only do it with the help of a translator and the input of experts in the field. I'm very grateful for these unsung heroes behind the scenes.
@@Ironskin Well, I could not think of a better person to handle a piece of mail armor than you :D
Wish I get a similar chance to handle a few swords n axes Ive been eyeing.
@@dan_the_dj There surely are other people. I'm feeling very flattered to be seen as an expert by you. :D
@@Ironskin its just my opinion.
Though, you sure are very passionate about what you do and thats awesome.
I love hearing all the nuisances of mail making.
Sure you can be a bit overwhelming with all the info, and for a guy just following along, wanting to make a suit of mail to hang in his room, it, it can be a bit scarry, but I know that by following your lead, I can make a great replica for myself.
Im just working out some kinks and reading up more before I actually start bending wire.
Lots of decisions to make, mail isnt as simple as I originally though.
Heck, I cant even pick a period for my piece 🤣
@@Ironskin Hey! You're batshit crazy if it's about the manufacturing of the rings themselve! :D
So you can take pride in that without any doubt! :)
And as long as you see room for improvement you will still be an expert!
More questions than answer :). Did you see what Thickness the Rings were?
We measured between 1,1 and 2mm wire thickness.
@@Ironskin What were the internal diameters of the rings? From the piece of paper towards the end it looked like 4.2-4.9mm, but I'm not sure I read it right.
Was there any consistency to the variations in wire thickness (eg: thicker on the chest, thinner on the arms) or was it random?
my gut reaction is that the pattern might have been like the tofta coif
looks like it. Not exactly but simmilar. I wonder what that inside connection could mean.
Why is the shirt just not complete? :'(
@@KinevKeiwan i would imagine the inside connection means that the coif was either added to an already existing hauberk during its working lifetime, or that the coif was added as an optional feature when the hauberk was sold
@@ef.9095 It's easier to attach a coif on a hauberk along an existing end, working an inside Layer , or a part would be inefficient and complicated to build, if there is no real benefit. Therefore it's an indication, that something was intended to be there.
@@ef.9095 I like how you think about it. For me it's more likely that this short stretch of the double layer is just a helpful feature for attaching a ventail. You sort of make the coif and add the ventail on top. There is some overlapping area that ensures that there are no gaps. I make my side ventails like that.
@@Ironskin that's a very good point, thank you
where is the maille piercing test u promised >:c
Oh crap, you still remember it. So I'll have to do it eventually. I already built half of a setup for the tests. It feels like I forgot homework at school. :D
East Roman or Old Rascian.