Part 72 - Q & A VI: Blackmaille at the faire!
by Lord Thomas the Black
Q & A VI: Blackmaille at the faire!
Welcome back to another edition of Blackmaille!
This month, I thought I’d cover some of the
common questions we get at the Black Oak Maille Guild’s annual demonstration
at the Kansas City Renaissance Festival. For the most part, I’ve avoided the
questions that I’ve already answered in previous Q&A articles, but sometimes
one sneaks through. Anyway, on with the show…
What are you doing here?
This is usually asked by obnoxious drunks late in the day, but occasionally by otherwise normal-seeming people who missed the huge “Black Oak MAILLE Guild” sign up front.
What we’re doing is demonstrating the craft
of making medieval maille armor. As best as we can, we’re copying the tools
and methods of the medieval period, and producing armor that is similar in
appearance, if not in exact make-up or methodology, to real maille armor of
the time. In addition, our “camp” setup portrays maillers on campaign, paid
personal armorers of a wealthy knight, left behind with the baggage train to
repair their knight’s armor at the end of the day. To this end, we explain the
difference between running a maille shop in town, and being a camp follower.
So what is the difference between running a shop and being a camp follower?
The main difference is one of productivity. In a shop in town, maille would be produced assembly-line style, with a separate apprentice assigned to each step of the process (one coiling wire, one cutting rings, etc). The emphasis in town is more on production of maille for sale. The shop is focused on making new maille garments to bring in business.
In the field, on the other hand, the emphasis
is more on repair of existing maille. Most of the day is spent on foraging for
food and supplies, or working on maille brought for repair the previous
evening. When the knights return from the day’s battle, then there’s work to
be done fixing holes and other damage to maille before the next day’s battle.
Each apprentice would be given his own workload to handle, and production of
new maille would be limited to a few rings here and there as needed.
How much does this weigh?
It depends on the piece we’re talking about.
A riveted maille coif might only weigh 5-6 lbs, while a butted maille hauberk
can weigh as much as 65-70 lbs. It all depends on the size of the piece, the
materials used, and the method of construction.
How long does this take?
Again, it depends on the piece in question.
Generally speaking, a coif will take about a month or so, working 2-3 hours a
day, while a hauberk will take close to six months. That’s for butted maille.
Figure roughly twice that if working in riveted maille.
Isn’t that tedious?
Tedious: adj. 1 Marked by dullness; long and tiresome. 2. Causing weariness or boredom, as through verbiosity. – syn. 1. Wearing, boring, tiring, monotonous, dull.
Wow. Once you look up the definition of “tedious”, that question’s just a bit rude, don’t you think? “Hey, you guys seem pretty busy, and seem to be having a lot of fun here, but isn’t this kind of thing about as interesting as watching paint dry?” Ironically, nine times out of ten, it’s the people who ask this who’ll stand there and watch us for an hour! As one of the great philosophers of our time once said, “Boredom sets into the boring mind”
To answer the question, no, I don’t find it
tedious at all. Granted, it’s long hours of work doing the same repetitive tasks
over and over, and some may find that tedious. I find it helps me to relax, and
it helps me focus (I have a mild case of ADD). For me, maille is a sort of
meditation, except that when I’m done, I’m not only relaxed and focused, I have
armor (try THAT in yoga class)!
Is this hard?
Short answer: No, not really. The individual
steps involved in making maille are all relatively easy by themselves, and once
you learn the patterns, weaving maille isn’t hard, wither. The only difficulties
I’ve come across are finding the time to work on it (if you don’t put in at
least 2-3 hours a day, you won’t see much in the way of progress), and when I
started doing riveted maille, finding the tools (tools for riveted maille can be
found online, if you’re willing to look for them, but period-looking tools are a
Which is better, scale or maille?
It depends on what you mean. If you’re looking
for armor for Roman re-enactment (for example), either one would work, as the
Roman Empire had and used both kinds of armor. If you’re talking about
protection, it depends on what you’re protecting against. Maille probably
protected better than scales against slashing attacks (assuming the scales are
attached to a leather backing, or tied to each other, like in lamellar). Against
archery, on the other hand, scale armor is the undeniable winner. We’ve proven
time and again at fest that bodkin-tipped arrows will puncture maille easily,
but have difficulty puncturing scales. If you’re talking about ease of
construction, I’m going to say maille, but that’s just my opinion. I’ve never
tried making scale armor (the Blackmaille on scale armor was written by a
student of mine with more experience in that than me). I would guess that
scale-maille gets easier with practice (like anything else), though.
I saw something about this on “Conquest” (or “MythBusters”)…
Woah, woah, woah, WOAH! Stop right there. Before you go too far into your question, we need to talk about these shows, and why I have to ask you to leave my demo if either of these are your only research into medieval armor (or you cite either show as a source of your “expertise” in maille). RANT MODE ON:
“Conquest” is (was?) a “documentary” series that appeared on the History Channel, starring actor, stuntman, and historical weapons expert Peter Woodward. In each episode he (or occasionally an outside expert) teaches his small group of assistants a particular type of weapon, or a set of weapons from a particular time period, while demonstrating their function, describing their comparative advantages and disadvantages, and discussing their history. Near the end, the host sets up a challenge in which the group must demonstrate their knowledge of the weapons in a simulated exercise. At times the exercise is largely scripted in advance, but at other times involves (safe) free sparring without a predetermined outcome. This adds a certain “reality TV” aspect to the show.
My problem with this show comes from the host’s (or writers’, or director’s, or producer’s) complete lack of research into the weapons, armor, etc that they’re displaying. Most of the armor and weapons are cheap Museum Replicas stuff, and their idea of “Finding out how effective this stuff was” consists of swinging them around and acting like they know what they’re talking about.
For example, in the “Arms and Armor of the Medieval Knight” episode, they put a butted-maille shirt on a wooden post, and hit it with an axe. Of course, they obliterated it. This leads Peter Woodward to wonder why maille was used as armor for so long, when it clearly wasn’t very effective. Maille was the dominant armor on the battlefields of medieval Europe for more than 1600 years (600 BCE - @ 1350 CE), and they didn’t use what didn’t work. I honestly can’t watch this episode past the first five minutes anymore.
“MythBusters” is a popular
science program on the Discovery Channel, starring special effects experts Adam
Savage and Jamie Hyneman, who use basic elements of the scientific method to
test the validity of various rumors and urban legends in popular culture. I
really liked this show when it first started, but lately, it’s degenerated into
“let’s see how much we can blow up real good in an episode”. “MythBusters” has
abandoned all pretense to research, accuracy, or education, and with it, their
credibility as a source in any argument. Most of their “mythbusting” consists of
testing a story under the original conditions, and if it’s “busted”, then they
try to see what it takes to MAKE it work. A lot of it involves building
elaborate, Rube-Goldberg-esque machines to test their harebrained theories, and
unfortunately, it’s usually because of these machines that the theory fails. For
example, in probably their most controversial failure ever, they were testing
the old Robin Hood “arrow-split-by-another-arrow” story. They built their
contraptions to shoot the arrows, and failed to split one with another try after
try. The problem is this: In the Errol Flynn “Robin Hood” movie they cited as
the source of this “myth”, that shot wasn’t trick photography! One
arrow was actually split by another, fired by a trained, professional trick-shot
archer! The DVD even shows him doing this shot again and again, and you can see
there’s no trick photography being used! For that matter, I (and others) have
personally witnessed this happening at the Crossbow Archery line at renfest!
Apparently, the prevailing theory on “MythBusters” is one of “If we can’t do it,
it can’t be done!” to which I have to call “shenanigans!” RANT MODE OFF
Well, that wraps it up for another edition of Blackmaille! Thanks for joining us again. As usual, any questions, comments, hate mail or fan mail can (and should) be sent to me at:
c/o Tom Beckett
13628 Belmead Ave
Grandview, MO 64030
Or you can email me at: firstname.lastname@example.org
See you next month!
Metallica, “The Struggle Within” Hetfield/Ulrich, 1991 Metallica rocks!
 Butted maille wasn’t used in the middle ages. All maille back then was riveted, and much stronger than modern butted maille.
 A wooden post does NOT, in any way, even remotely approximate the resistance given by a human body. Not only that, but Woodward didn’t even bother with putting a shirt and gambeson under the maille, which makes a world of difference as well.
 Axes weren’t the dominant weapon on the battlefield during the “Age of Mail”. The weapon that should have been used was the sword. The axe became more popular as a weapon after the transition to plate armor in the latter Middle Ages.
Back to the Blackmaille Webpage
Back to the Cúm an Iolair Information Webpage
Articles: ©2003, 2004, 2005, 2006,
2007, 2008, 2009
Thomas Becket/Lord Thomas the Black
e-mail questions & comments to: email@example.com
Hosting: ©2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008,
Ron Knight/Modar Neznanich