| Item | Description | ID* | OD* | Rivet Style | Solid Links |
| 1) | Hauberk | Larger to ~same | Larger to ~same | Round | Yes |
| 4) | Bishop's Mantle | ~Same | Lighter | Triangular | No |
| 7) | Hauberk | ~Same | ~Same | Round | No |
| 8) | Bishop's Mantle | ~1/8 - 1/16" | ~18-20ga | Triangular | No |
| 10) | Hauberk | Smaller | Undetermined | Round | Yes |
| 13) | Hauberk | Smaller | Smaller | Triangular | No |
| * Relative to 5/16" ID, 16ga (.063") links | |||||
I would also like to note that in the course of my research, I have come to believe that most mail was made of iron. The Museum of Art lists these suits as being made of steel. I have decided, however, that without evidence to the contrary or at least knowledge of what techniques were used to examine these pieces, I should defer to their judgement. Please keep in mind that all metals listed as steel may, in fact, be iron. I will update the essay as soon as further information becomes available.
As the description states, this is a full hauberk. The sleeves are three-quarter length, extending down to or just past the elbows. The top of the hauberk extends to the neckline, but not onto the neck. The bottom of the hauberk is knee or lower thigh length, and has a horseman's slit (that is, it is slit in the front and back).
The suit is constructed so that if the arms are extended fully to the sides, the weave direction is the same as on the body. Today, this is commonly called the T method (as opposed to the 45 degree method). There are two slits in the front of the armour. The first is the horseman's slit, as mentioned earlier. The second is at the top, running from the middle of the chest to the neck line. Unlike the bottom slit, the sides of this one overlap, and would presumably be held closed with some sort of buckle and strap. Unfortunately this hardware was not present on the display piece. This slit at the top would allow a closer fit at the neck, as the final neck hole would not need to be large enough to fit over the head.
Upon inspection, it can be seen that this suit is made of alternating rows of riveted and solid links. Both links varied in gauge and inner diameter throughout the piece, being thickest across the chest and thinnest at the ends of the arms. The change in the links is visible but subtle, consisting of approximately three sizes of links. The largest is on the chest, back, and front of the shoulders and upper arms. The second largst covers the lower abdomen, remainder of the back, and most of the arms (including the back of the upper arms). The smallest links are placed only at the ends of the arms. The large links are larger in both gauge and inner diameter to my (.063", 5/16") links, and the smallest have approximately the same inner diameter with a lighter gauge.
At a glance, the riveted and solid links are almost indistinguishable, however there are differences. The solid links are of a slighty smaller gauge wire, but wound to the same inner diameter as the riveted links. They are also slightly flatter than the riveted links. The solid links are flattened such that the top and bottom surfaces are still rounded, but the inner and outer edges tend to come to a point. These solid links appear to be made from wire in a similar fashion as the riveted links, which leads me to postulate that they were first welded, then flattened.
The riveted links, on the other hand, are flattened such that the inner and outer edges are still rounded. The ends are overlapped for approximately 1/3 the circumference of the ring. The excess material from the overlapped ends being flattened to the same total height as the rest of the ring tend to push inwards. That is, that the outside of the links tend to be very circular, while the inside has a 'bulge' where the rivet is.
The rivets themselves are very nicely rounded on top and bottom. Both the top and side views of the rivet show a round shape, although the tops of the rivets tend to be slightly flat. The rivet shaft is also round. Evidence of this can be seen on several links that have lost their rivets, plainly showing a circular hole. These circular holes can be seen on the largest and smallest sized links.
The second piece in the CMA exhibit is indeed a version of what we call a Bishop's Mantle. This is a rather large specimen. On the sides, the cape extends to cover the upper arms. There are two large dags centered on the front and back, of equal size, such that the front dag would cover the upper abdomen. The top of the garment extends upwards to cover the neck. There is a slit in the back for dressing into the mantle, however due to the piece's placement, it is impossible to tell how far down the slit extends. There is also a buckle on the left side of the neck, but no corresponding strap exists.
The pattern of this piece is different than the modern replicas that I have seen. This mantle is not crafted using the 'expanding rings' method, or at least not entirely so. Centered on the front (and perhaps some of the back, see above) is a 45-degree seam, exactly as is used on some modern hauberk reconstructions. This seam runs from the bottom point of the dag up to the neckline, but not onto the neck itself. The sides would then have presumably used some form of expanding rings to be shaped correctly, but the use should not be as significant as if the entire mantle was constructed in this manner. The neck covering is interesting in that it does not follow the body weave pattern, but stays consistently horizontal around the entire neck. There is a small amount of brass trim at the top of the neck, and remnants indicate that the bottom of the garment was also brass at one point.
This mantle is made entirely of riveted links. The wire gauge throughout the body is relatively constant, but the rings covering the arms are noticeably thicker than those across the chest. The inner diameter of these rings appears to be only slightly less than the modern pieces I have been using for comparison, but the gauge is significantly lighter. This combination, along with the 'density' at which the piece was woven, draws the mail very tight. As a result, this piece has the appearance of being very flimsy, especially as compared to the other items on display.
The links on the body appear to have a round crossection, although the gauge is light enough to make this an uncertain observation. The neck, on the other hand, is made entirely of flattened links. The gauge of these links appears to be slightly heavier than the body, although the difference in flattening makes this only a guess. The neck is made of links that are much smaller than those of the body. The outer diameter of these links is smaller than the inner diameter of the rest of the links in the suit.
While the links on the body are mostly round, it still appears that the entire ring was flattened, not just the overlapping ends. There is only a small amount of overlapping, perhaps less than one quarter of the entire circumference. Unlike the previous hauberk, the inside of these rings are round and the displaced metal from the overlapped ends tends to the outside of the link. As seen from several links with missing rivets, the rings were punched with a thin, rectangular hole.
These rectangular holes leads me to believe that this mantle was constructed using the triangular rivet style. Unfortunately, none of the surviving rivets can be clearly seen. This is because all the rivets appear to be covered in some sort of solder-type melted metal. This covers the entire rivet and most of the overlapped section of the ring. It also protrudes noticably from the link; the rivets in this piece are much more noticable than the round rivets from 1).
Although it is difficult to tell on the smaller links around the neck, they appear to have been made in the same fashion, only without the solder. As has been noted in other historical pieces, the brass links appear to have been closed with steel rivets.
Compared to the other items on display here, this hauberk appears to be very standard in design. Like them, it has the three-quarter sleeve, T-style design. It has the dressing-slit in the front of the neck, but no horseman's or footman's slits.
This suit is made from the same gauge and diameter links from the neck downwards. The neck does, however, change the weave direction in the same manner as the mantles (4 and 8). Once again, there is a buckle on the left side, presumably used to close the neck-slit in the front. There is also brass trim around ends of the neck, sleeves, and bottom of the suit.
Moving down the suit, the next interesting design feature is the arm construction. The ends of the arms have flaps on the outside that make the outer face approximately three inches longer than the inside. While this would offer greater protection on the arms, applied only where necessary to reduce weight, these flaps must have been fastened down in some way during use. Otherwise, they are long enough to just hang uselessly from the arm.
The last obvious peculiarity in design is the lack of a walking slit at the bottom of the piece. While this suit appears to have been at least knee-length, there are no breaks as are commonly seen to aid in walking or riding. This leads me to believe that this was a foot soldier's armour. Instead of slits, the suit widens out considerably from the waist downward, like a dress. While close analysis was not possible, this seems obvious by looking at the lay of the links. There is a noticable 'V' along the front that almost looks like a 45 degree join, but which must be where many of the added rings are.
This piece of armour is made entirely using riveted links. While they most likely do not have a rectangular cross-section, these rings are second only to the next hauberk (10) in flatness. The ends of the ring overlap only a very small amount, so little that I dare not guess at the percentage of the circumference. The small overlap area combined with the extreme flatness of the links leads to a prominent bulge from the displaced metal towards the outside edge of the ring. These rings all appear to be made of approximately 16 ga, 5/16" inner diameter wire with a larger outer diameter from flattening. These links are extremely regular with very circular inner edges.
Throughout the piece, the holes are not punched in the center of the overlapped area, but very close to the inside edge. Often, I had to double-check rings to make certain that the rivet was not in fact clamped around the link on the inside edge. The links on this suit are punched with round holes for the rivets. Many of the brass links in the bottom are missing their rivets, and each of these has a round hole. It is difficult to tell if any rings with rivets are raised in a similar manner. Since no steel rings were visibly missing their rivets, one can only assume that they were made in the same manner. The brass rings appear to be shut with steel rivets.
Although listed as a "collar," most modern recreationists would call this a bishop's mantle. The museum lists this as a collar, I presume, because it is much smaller than the other mantle on display. Like that one, this piece covers the neck and shoulders, but stops short of the arms. In the front, there is a single dag that is not mirrored in the back which extends down approximately the length of the sternum.
Despite the difference in the size of the two mantles, they are constructed in a very similar manner. The weave on the neck is just like the other pieces, staying horizontal around. This collar also uses the 45 degree connecting method that the first mantle uses, where the joint runs directly down the front to the end of the dag. Once again, there is a dressing slit in the back and the seemingly-standard buckle on the left side of the neck; like the first mantle, the length of the slit in back cannot be seen. This piece also has brass trim as the top two rows around the neck and the last four rows around the bottom edge.
The links used in making this mantle are the smallest I have ever seen in riveted mail. The links used on the neck of the other mantle are small, but even they are larger than the rings used for the entirety of this piece. My estimation, which is admittedly rough, is that the inner diameter of these links is between 1/8" and 3/16" and the wire is between 18ga and 20ga. They are mostly flat, but the extent of the flattening is difficult to tell from such small links. It is most likely that they have a rectangular cross-section. The overlapped ends are displaced to the outside of the ring, leaving the inside edge mostly round.
Also like the other mantle, this one was made using triangular rivets. Again, there are links missing with thin, rectangular slots that lead me to this conclusion. The brass in this piece is very interesting, though. First, the brass links in this mantle appear to be closed with brass rivets. Although the links are small, from my vantage point I could not see any of the telltale silver marks that indicated steel rivets in the other pieces. It is also interesting that although the bulk of the piece seems to be made of riveted links, the last row of brass at the top and bottom appear to be solid rings.
This suit is made in the style that one might expect from this collection: three-quarter T-sleeves, knee length. It is also not surprising to find horseman's slits, a dressing slit, or the weave direction on the neck. What is surprising, however, are how some of these features are implemented.
The most striking irregularity with this suit is that the entire front is open. Instead of a 'dressing slit' that all of the other pieces have, this example has the slit running the entire, right down the center. The suit is held closed with a series of straps and buckles that run down the front. These are replacements, but are presumably similar to the originals in function. One interesting effect of this arrangement is that this suit has very little slack in it as compared to the others and should be considerably lighter because of this. The back still has the horseman's slit, although it is a small one.
Another interesting feature of the design is the weave around the neck. The rings around the neck are woven horizontally, just like the other pieces that have this style, but the height of the region running in this direction is only three links. Once again, there is brass trim, but only for the last two rows of the arms and the bottom edge.
This suit is made of alternating rows of solid and riveted rings. Except for the rivets, which can be easily seen, the two types of rings are completely indistinguishable; the basic shape, size, and gauge appear to be the same. The links are of a slightly smaller inner diameter but a larger outer diameter than the mail to which the other pieces are also compared. The rings themselves are completely flattened, to the point that there is no noticable rounding on the tops and edges. By all appearances, this wire should have a completely rectangular cross section.
In many ways, these rings look like modern washers. The width of the wire, once flattened, is not extraordinarily less than the inner diameter of the rings. The width to which the rings have been flattened is also similar to that of modern washers compared to the other dimensions. They differ from washers, however, because neither the outside nor inside edges of the links are particularly round. Overall, the rings are fairly irregular, with large flat edges that often make the links look more polygonal than circular. The dimensions of the rings give the weave enough overlap that from a distance it looks like a solid sheet of iron molded to fit a person. Even up close there are very few visible holes in the weave.
Round rivets were used in the making of this suit. Around the holes, the brass rings are indented on one side and raised on the other. Any assumptions made about the punching process from this are suspect, however, since it may be that the rivets pulled through the links and created these raisings at that time.
This hauberk follows all the standards set by those before it. It has the popular neck piece, with both a horsman's slit and a dressing slit in the front. The horseman's slit is in the front only because the front of the shirt extends about four inches further than the back. This is certainly to allow coverage of the most exposed part of the leg while still adding the least amount of weight. One other spot of difference is that the buckle is not present, but that is not to say that it was not there originally. This suit also has three rows of brass trim at the top of the neck.
The rings that make up this suit are mostly the same gauge and inner diameter, but the abdomen is covered by slightly thicker links. The entire piece, though, is made of rings with a slightly smaller gauge and inner diameter than the 5/16", 16ga (.063") wire. The links are flattened a bit, but still are mostly round. The displaced metal from the overlapped ends is evenly distributed to the inside and outside of the rings. The neck on this suit is considerably covered, and the links used in that area are much smaller than the rest of the suit.
The rivets on this suit are covered with the same sort of 'solder' used on the first mantle, 4). On this piece, however, some of these coverings have cracked off, revealing exceptionally round rivet heads. This caused me, at first, to conclude that the rivet shafts were also round, but this appears to not be the case. The links that are missing rivets clearly show rectangular slits, which makes me think that triangular rivets were in fact used. The similarities between the 'soldered' rings and the rings with the round heads lead me to believe that they are all original, however without closer inspection I cannot rule out the possibility that they are replacement links. I was unable to determine what material was used to close the brass links.
Plaque text is copyrighted © by the Cleveland Museum of Art, and is used without permission.
| 22 March 1999 : | First draft completed. |
| 20 March 1999 : | Updated through third piece. |
| 18 March 1999 : | Updated through second piece. |
| 17 March 1999 : | Essay written through first piece. |