Originally posted by Calvin+Jun 3 2005, 05:23 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Calvin @ Jun 3 2005, 05:23 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The only mail I ever seen 'live' is a repro from 'Il Museo del Soldatino' of Calenzano (Firenze). I can assure that the mail is heavy enough (more than 15Kg) and hearing the museum's director, such mail has been reproduced using the same techniques of 1200/1300. [/b]
That mass for this size of shirt is about right so the wire should be about the right gauge, hence the appearance should be correct.
<!--QuoteBegin-Calvin@Jun 3 2005, 05:23 PM
BTW (but without starting another war please!!!, it's only an anecdote!) about 'accuracy' and how swords are currently painted, Fabrizio (the museum's director) was telling me that the 'real' swords was covered with a mix of fat and horsehair, to avoid to get rusty (such iron was not like the modern steel). So, if not by the cut, the wounded guy will die for an infection... (where 'cut' is just a metaphor..., because such swords was not for cutting, but to shatter, seeing the rest of skeletons, only the point of the sword was sharped, to drive the 'coup de grace'...). [/quote]
Ah... one has to be careful about museum staff's interpretation of weapons and their use from their sometimes limited practical experience of things - some are much more knowledgeable than others but many are sedentary and you might read comments that a sword is 'heavy and unwieldy' when an experienced swordsman would find them light and properly balanced!
The horsehair and fat is, I'm sure, a reference to the lining of the scabbard - in northern Europe unwashed wool was used in a similar manner because of its natural lanolin content. The primary function of this is the keep the blade from rusting, secondary effects of wound infection would just be a bonus! Later on - because of fashion and slimmer blades - scabbards I think were most frequently made of wooden laths bound in leather, until leather only was used for swords like the rapier.
My first question about a comment that swords were 'blunt' is, at what date? Then define blunt :lol: Sword forms changed a lot from the early mediaeval period through the 13th/14th century and into the 16th and their form reflected the way in which they were used - strongly-pointed swords are intended as thrusting weapons, parallel edges with a shallow taper at the point indicate a cutting/slashing technique was used and there are 'cut and thrust' swords used with a combination of techniques. I can assure you some period weapons were very definitely sharp - the Viking sagas and other written accounts make it plain that fine swords were quite capable of doing what we'd imagine a sword could do
and the remains in the mass grave at Wisby and other battlefields show that a good sword in the hands of a skilled swordsman could easily strike a lightly-protected limb off.
As for the
coup de grace, the dagger began to be carried for this express purpose it would appear - the name of one type, the misericorde, makes their use plain. As cold blooded as it sounds, their stiff, slim blades were designed to be able to go through the vision slits of a helm, which was the easiest way to kill a downed man in armour.
Einion
