Why This Chainmail Shirt Is FASCINATING 

Tell me about it.

Same

Same here

We have a few more to come from this visit! And we’re always game for going back.

​@@testedPleeeease dont stop! Its such a great way for museums to show off the wealth of items they have tucked away. And having it explained in this way, with passion and clear explanations is priceless!

During that time India was by far the most wealthy country on the planet

@@missourimongoose8858 it was the Mughal empire not India you think of today created by the British

And did they say the individual rings are riveted?? The amount of time that must have gone into making this is crazy.

@@FectacularSpail good chainmail was riveted in the past. Poor chainmail, the rings were simply bent into shape without any adhesion.

I've seen chainmail like this a few times, it's gorgeous. There's also a lovely set at the MET in NYC where the rings are two tone colors to reveal Arabic script in the weave.

I'm filing this video away as "+3 Chainmail. while attuned, the wearer is under the 'protection from evil and good' spell."

The names are stamped with a dye, easier than inscribing

Thank you for this!

More to come, too!

Yeah, like the British museum. Get on that Met armor people.

So glad to hear! We have a couple more to go from this last visit!

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for commenting!

I might not go full-on magenta or lime... but otherwise totally agreed. Or at the least, provide a super clear diagram delineating which portions are replica. Always hate having to track down a docent to figure this out.

I don't agree at all, this clearly wasn't a disposable item, and when you say "Many things dealing with arms & armor were practically (or actually) disposable." That's also not really true, just the sheer amount of rehilted swords, mismatching and adapted armor show this. There aren't to many metal tools and weaponry or armor that were disposable in general until very recently. Where do you even draw the line, is medieval armor repaired and restored in the 16th to 19th century fine? If it's battle damage, or things that were destroyed on purpose like the weaponry and jewelry at Illerup adal, no museum is going to hide that. But you're talking about damage from a couple of centuries of corrosion and neglect. Also, just imagine if art museums would do what you say, there wouldn't be a single painting made before the 20th century that wouldn't be either nearly completely black, or a mess of flashy colors. With buildings there is also discussion on a similar subject, on the one hand you had architects like Viollet-le-Duc, who did full restorations, often filling in the blanks with his own creation. This gives historic buildings (or city in the case of carcasonne) a purpose, gets tourists in, and gives a new lease of life. On the other hand you had Charles Reed Peers, who's school of thought was to leave ruins like they are, and not to restore them. The problem is that we have always been rebuilding and restoring buildings, For example, there are very, very few gothic cathedrals with their original timber roof structure, the vast majority of those burned down, and were replaced, from the 19th century onwards often with cast iron or steel structures. You could never tell that from the outside, so we still get to know and enjoy what a gothic cathedral looks like.

@@slome815 Obviously the chain fabric isn't disposable. Metal parts rarely are. That wasn't the point of my second argument. My point is that replacing everything that is missing and attempting to make it look "whole" gives people the wrong idea about how durable/long-lasting these items were on average, since everybody wants to display a "whole" piece. The painting argument? Well yes that does sort of break mine. That stuff is so fragile that it slowly dissappears over the ages without constant maintenance. Surely there must be a middle ground though. I have seen too many objects that, upon close inspection, are 95% rebuilt. And that has always felt disingenuous.

A few more to come!

They mentioned in the video how often mail was repurposed, repaired and reused. Once weapons and armor were made reusing and recycling were the way to go. It was much easier to start with steel already mined, refined, and forged into something than it was to mine and create steel from nothing so it was done regularly.

Well, that guy had one of the most powerful men of the time breathing on his neck, expecting only the highest quality. I don't know how zen that would be!

The "making of" extras on the Lord of the Ring movies has a bit where the Weta people talk about making all the mail for the movies. It's plastic but the concept is the same. They definitely got into a certain mindset for the months it took them.

It’s like knitting, just in metal.

Mail is prone to damage from wearing alone and needs constant repair if worn in the field. Wouldn't it be sacrilegious to not immediately repair any damage in a good as new quality? Seems like a huge religious liability.

@@waynebimmel6784 that's not how maille works at all. Maille is self cleaning and incredibly easy to maintain. The only reason you would even think it wasn't is because Indian-made maille hauberks are really badly made and are what are used by the overwhelming majority of reenactors.

Love your comment. Thank you for taking the time to make it; it really means a lot to us.