That shape at the tip is called a "cubeoctohedron" as not only can you make one by cutting the corners off a cube, but you can make it by cutting the corners off of an octahedron. An interesting feature is that it is the only polyhedron whose edge lengths are equal to the length of a vertex to the center.

@clothar23

2 жыл бұрын

And we've spotted the geometry major.

@docstockandbarrel

2 жыл бұрын

Wow, Debbie downer. Why you gotta school on a good time?? 😂😂😂

@andrewprahst2529

2 жыл бұрын

@@clothar23 Never even went to college

@mattcloud66

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrewprahst2529 This makes the insight you gave even better. Thank you man

@nullifye7816

2 жыл бұрын

My inner geometry nerd got incredibly giddy upon seeing that incredible polyhedron in glorious steel. Good to know what's it's called. Isn't a 14-sided shape a "tetradecagon"? Is this a subcategory thereof?

i think one possible advantage is when using it on horseback. Since it only flexes in one plain you can swing it without hitting your horse even after the ball bounces.

@lothbroke

2 жыл бұрын

I was just thinking the same thing. Well put.

@jm9371

2 жыл бұрын

You might be on to something there.

@L_Monke

2 жыл бұрын

I wonder if you even need to swing it to deal significant damage to the head from horse's speed and weight of the ball alone.

@hansjohannsen6722

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah! On sheild for the win!

@mikebadjester940

2 жыл бұрын

Was about to say the same thing as a normal flail especially on the rebound may swing into your horse causing injury or make the horse bolt or throw the rider. This flail will always return on the path you made the attack. I would love to see Jason Kingsley try it out when mounted.

This seems like a good way to avoid accidentally hitting your horse when using a flail while mounted.

@rab7034

2 жыл бұрын

DH.....Yes but I can't think of a single thing that was made to work by using a "bicycle" chain during the middle ages! Most mechanical works were connected by belts, (as in a water wheel-- powered by) not by BICYCLE or any OTHER "roller bearing" chain!! AGAIN.....I thought "bicycles" AND their chains, weren't invented till much later in history! 🙂

@smartstudyingdoggo9031

26 күн бұрын

@@rab7034Still, it’s not exactly a complex piece of equipment when broken down into its most rudimentary parts. Take a bunch of somewhat thin steel plates and shingle them with rivets between. A bit hard to make, but so is an ornate set of armour and people did that, so it’s not out of the window. Although, I’d say you’d be looking at the 16th century and beyond for that, keeping in mind the quality of steel required for such a task.

The first flail was probably invented when some oik surprised a slinger.

I could imagine Mendoza meant a chain similar to this, but with the links being at 90° to each other, thus allowing movement in any dircetion, while still not being contractible and not being able to be pryed open

@davidasterino3718

2 жыл бұрын

That's exactly the thought I had listening to him.

@iainburgess8577

2 жыл бұрын

That .. would effectively be a repeating universal joint (as used in socket sets, square drive ratchet wrench, etc) they aren't actually equally free in all directions, the diagonals lock & bind, especially relevant to the type of free movement desired here. Also be Far more complex to make, maybe impossible for that period, and likely be a complete innovation; we've only had anything like that complex as a repeating piece be made in the last couple of decades. An ordinary chain would do better, be cheaper & be more durable; the pins are the weak point of complex chains, they're always thinner than a standard chain link would be.

@motagrad2836

2 жыл бұрын

Each link could have two pins or rivots (one near each end limiting movement of next link) to stabilize each end it so they can not contract. I have seen chains with such in the past

@andreas_rr

2 жыл бұрын

@@iainburgess8577 i dont quite see how it would be impossible for that time. i mean, if you just take this chain as it is, and have the single links be rivited at an 90° angle, while the double links are kept the same. that would just change the direction in which half of half the links is rivited through...... i mean, it doesnt have to be exactly modern universal joints. and yes, they wont have perfectly free mobility, but it would be far superior to this single planar one.. perhaps it would be even better to have 45° or anything, but that might bring other issues. either way i'd imagine the 90° one to be a lot more usable similar to a Montante than Matt's one

@MrBottlecapBill

2 жыл бұрын

@@motagrad2836 This was my take on it too. A normal chain, but with the extra space inside the middle of each link taken up with a rivet and or insert so the links can't contract but can still maintain most of their regular chain like action otherwise. I suppose you could twist each link into a figure 8 as well to save material, but that wouldn't limit constriction to the same degree.

We need more shots of you giggling while swinging this thing like a madman.

Oh yeah, Matt. Flails go all the way back to the Neolithic at the minimum :) In America (and I think Africa as well), you can find a lot of tribal weapons using rocks, sand, or wood as the load which would then be attached to the handle with either rope (think monkey-fist knots) or with a sewn rawhide bag. Many are very short flails (what you might call a "flop head club" or a "fruit-cosh" in more contemporary periods). When comparing these weapons with poorly preserved but much older findings from Europe and the Isles, more than one weapons historian has concluded they were equivalent items. It's even been one of the many theories proposed as to why the Isles are so full of worked, sometimes ornate, spherical stones. Robert Escobar has written a very good book on the history and use of such lower class flexible weapons called, *Saps, Blackjacks and Slungshots: A History of Forgotten Weapons.*

This chain looks like it could potentially be easier to control from horseback. I would imagine a normal chain would need a greater wind-up to reach its full extension. This one looks like you could more easily accelerate it to its full extension without swinging it all the way around your head, which may make it easier to hit a target you're riding past. Might make it harder to accidentally dome your horse as well

@thekillers1stfan

2 жыл бұрын

But you also couldn't hold it to your side and twirl for easy kills

@midshipman8654

2 жыл бұрын

not to mention the up and down motion of a horse in gallop would mess up extention a lot.

@MusMasi

2 жыл бұрын

and dome yourself not just the horse lol.

@bookman7409

2 жыл бұрын

That's my thought, as well, since it would improve your aim by limiting the movement to a single plane. My imagination is that it's a backup weapon for shock charges, after your long and pointy's gone. At full gallop, plus a well-timed swing, you've got one hell of a lot of kinetic energy you can deliver, especially against infantry. A slack chain, however, would need to be more carefully swung, in the same situation. Minor variations could translate or cumulate into missing outright, so that ties up a lot of attention that could be better spent elsewhere. That's what I know about mechanics, physics, and military history tell me, anyway. I could be wrong, in whole or in part.

@Qaos

2 жыл бұрын

I definitely agree. The movement being limited to a flat arc would definitely help prevent hitting your own horse, 'n' would also lessen the impact o' oscillation from a galloping horse. Whether or not that means that the weapon was actually used like that I dunno, but I think that it certainly supports that possibility.

Tod put in the work on that one. The twist is perfectly executed (pun intended) and that pommel is beautifully intricate. The only miss is not making the head a D12. But that would probably make it too smooth. I know a D20 would be too smooth.

@Nachtmahr79

2 жыл бұрын

If you attach the chain to one of the poles, the central rim of a D12 should be quite effective in concentrating and transferring the energy. It might be even better than this design, because here you have a good chance of hitting with a flat side, because the head can spin, which does disperse the energy to a wider area. Edit: I was dumb! I confused the shape of a D12 and a D10.... The D10 would be great, because it has this nice rim in the center.

@hanelyp1

2 жыл бұрын

For a regular dodecahedron, attach the chain to the center of a face.

@MrBottlecapBill

2 жыл бұрын

It's really well made. I feel like the chain is still a tad too long. If your hand rides up on that pommel a bit you're in danger. Especially if you have large hand like Matt does.

Maybe you should do the “Let me show you its features,” with a German accent and a laugh. (Edited for grammar, lol)

@johanmetreus1268

2 жыл бұрын

Ever noticed he does NOT laugh in his German videos?

From the Mendoza description you read, it could also mean round rings riveted closed like chain maille, rather than effectively butted like crappy maille. No idea if that's the intent, but that's what it made me think of.

Hi Matt, apologies, I have just seen this excellent analysis and do have to agree that the chain is the weak point and that was one of the reasons I originally dismissed this as not being real and it was only after I saw medieval depictions of the chain I looked again. I would love to come down and see how your students are getting on with the flails.

@philipburnham4099

Жыл бұрын

From the description Matt read from I believe what is being described is a chain made up of inline swivels with the j-hooks joining each section together.

One thing I noticed is it seems to be quieter than a normal chain flail. Can't confirm as I've never used either, but it seems like it would rattle less both in combat and when worn on a belt.

@louisvictor3473

2 жыл бұрын

You probably have seen a disconnected bike chain and regular chains, so you kinda already saw the relevant bits to compare; and you're exactly correct.

I think it is the product of someone making a better mouse trap. People try all sorts of things, some work better than others.

Suggestion, to test the viability of the bike chain flail in a mounted context, we're going to need you to ride a bicycle one-handed and with the other hand, swing this flail at a target. You might want to do it on soft-ish ground in case you fall and with an expendable bicycle.

I think in Korean history there is strong precedent for two handed flails on horseback, so who knows, might be the same in Europe but perhaps less common.

That pommel looks really nice

I kinda miss the old ballistic head days. I'd be interested to see how much damage that would do to a head analogies through a helmet. Also a decibel reading from inside the helm!

@MrBottlecapBill

2 жыл бұрын

Spoiler: Lots! 😁

The spiraling above the hilt would offer some protection from and opponents weapons sliding down it into the wielders hands. Mendoza could be referring to the type of chain made of 2 half links with a rivet through the middle similar to modern cast chain with middle bar in the link. This would greatly reduce the chance of the chain collapsing on itself as well as offer a slight reduction in twisting.

As others said, on horseback having a flail that's not floppy might make it easier to control and less likely to inadvertently impact the horse. A collaboration with Jason of Modern History would be amazing content

I have a chrome plated belt made from what appears to be a two sprocket motorcycle chain. I wear it when I am visiting an area or a club with a less than savory reputation. My thought is that, if I find myself in a tough situation, I peel off the belt and use it as a weapon. Since my "belt" has two runs of sprocket holes, if I swing it oriented one way, it is as rigid as any sword (and MUCH heavier!. It does NOT flex!) But if I rotate it 90 degrees it flexes easily and can "dissuade" an attacker rather than crushing his ribs, collar bone or breaking his arms. I have never seen another example of such a "multipurpose" devise.

Has there ever been a version whereupon all the flailing heads were comprised of the pommels of several swords repurposed for ending someone rightly quite definitively?

@Lurklen

2 жыл бұрын

Once, but the weapon was seen as a herald of the end times. It was used only in a single battle, which resulted in the deaths of thirty men (including the wielder), three cows, five chickens, a horse, two dogs, and a single marmot. It was then buried in an undisclosed location to await the day of perdition, it is thought to be held in the vaults of the Vatican, or possibly in the Tower of London (though some think it was taken to the Americas). No one knows who made it, by the decree of six royal families and the Pope, the individual's name was erased from history. It has no official name. But in some circles is known as the "Flail of Perdition" as it is meant to be wielded by the Antichrist in the end times. By all accounts it cannot be destroyed.

This thing is just beautyful. Tod did a really great Job. Awesome. Really enjoyed your previous Video with Tod. That thing is just scary. I would love test this flail.

I would say that the "bike chain flail" theoretically has a big advantage over standard flails and perhaps a second one. 1. Rebound controll. Firstly the only way that the head can pass the handle is over the top of the handle and the plane of rebound is controlled by chain alignment chosen by the user. This means that there are little chance of a rebound hitting yourself, your horse or ally. 1b, Possibly you can direct the rebound in a direction you favour to minimise time between swings or gain a favorable arc for the next swing. 2. The ability to parry. By twisting the flail when extended by the users swing and basically using the "flat side" of the chain to deflect enemy strikes with considerable force. 2b, Possibly you can lock a blade by twisting your hand (as if the flail was a sword breaker) if your chain is twisted around the opponents weapon. These theoretical advantages should be easy to check against a few static targets.

@Blaisem

Жыл бұрын

You can't parry with the chain, because it will snap the chain. The chain is a weak point that will require care in even a single instance of combat, not even getting to the extended usage of a battlefield.

@densamme1752

Жыл бұрын

@@Blaisem why on earth would you think that? It doesn't even need to be a high carbon steel it has no edge?

@Blaisem

Жыл бұрын

@@densamme1752 Because a chain of thin metal is a weak point? They discuss in the video too.

@densamme1752

Жыл бұрын

@@Blaisem that chain is thin, the design doesn't call for a thin chain. They point out that THIS chain is to thin/flimsy for that reason it's more a studie in how the usage would differ from a classic flail that is the point

@Blaisem

Жыл бұрын

@@densamme1752 yes, a classical flail doesn't use a bike chain.

I wonder if the restricted range of motion offered by this bicycle style chain would have been useful in, or designed to better suite, the context of fighting in a formation. If you held it right, you could possibly limit the different ways it could ricochet, so you don’t inadvertently hit the fellows standing shoulder to shoulder with you.

@hjorturerlend

2 жыл бұрын

Eh, think the main reason is to just give you better control of the flail in general.

@andrewholdaway813

2 жыл бұрын

It might be advantageous on horseback, keeping the flail in the plane of travel.

@brettpalmer1770

2 жыл бұрын

That would make sense.

@foldionepapyrus3441

2 жыл бұрын

Indeed, and I suspect that might be what the document was suggesting though translation too - the stiffness in one axis means when you are changing the direction of the sweep on the fly the chain will naturally resist the heads inertia better than a loose chain or rope would - so it will keep extended to its full length better.

I can imagine some interesting ways this might be used charging on horseback. It's like how you describe aiming the point or edge of a saber at your enemy while the horse does the work but instead you are aiming an iron ball. With that chain being ridged in one direction you could really control where the ball was floating and as bonus it would be less likely to hit your horse after impact if the chain only moves one way.

Well the use of the chain or a Pro of this chain seems quite obvious : when u hit sth., edge aligned, it can only go one way back. So it combines the potential of hitting around shields, legs and corners, but you know exactly : when it bounces back, it is going to move exactly this way. Cause obviously it can't " collapse" cause its not loose rings, and it also can't move sideways. So you don't accidently hit your mate, ur own head or even ur own horse. So less risk of hitting ur mate, while it can still do the nasty work of "coming around edges" which is the real reason to choose a flail over a mace.

I love the technical terms you use....hitty bit. 😂😂😂😂

I think flails were originally agricultural implements pressed into military use by farmers and when they were first adapted as uniquely military weapons they proved to be occasionally dangerous to a mounted soldier or his horse because of the lack of control and lack of the connected feeling (you might not realize you had accidentally hit you horse on the back swing) and this chain is a reaction to the problem. They have great potential for a mounted fighter as I think it would be much less jarring when you strike your opponent. When moving fast on a horse not being kineticly connected to the impact of your weapon is likely a great advantage, you might feel more free to strike as hard as you can knowing you will be able to hold on to your weapon and will not feel the pain of a slightly misaligned strike.

Two possible advantages I can see from it. 1. You dont have to worry about the chain snagging on itself or somehow knotting up. It will always drop or extend to full length. 2. With edge alignment it wont bounce off and tangle up on your horse. As a side note I also see some judo style strangles that possibly could be more effective with that style of chain instead of a more traditional one.

In eastern Europe heavy cavalery used the one handed ones as part of their gear. Seen an almost identical one in our national war museum.

Thinking of it, i could imagine it being possibly an interesting change to the weapon, if the handle was linked to the chain with a "classical" ring link. that would make the weapon be more or less omnidirectional (thus no "edge alignment") but still have the chain not really entangle on itself...

@thatstarwarsnerd6641

2 жыл бұрын

I’m not certain, but I feel like edge alignment would still matter, as the main benefit of a chain weapon is that it can wrap around the target, and that link would just make it impossible to line up the chain reliably

@Nachtmahr79

2 жыл бұрын

A setup like that would be very prone to stress the chain in the wrong direction, thus increasing the propability of weapon failure significantly. If you hit the target with the flat side of the chain, all the enegy of the ball is being transferred to the chain, because it can´t wrap around objects in that direction. An iron chain would most likely bend on one of the single layer links, shortening the chain and making the weapon extremely awkward to use. A chain from hardened steel would just snap or the rivets would burst open.

@andreas_rr

2 жыл бұрын

@@Nachtmahr79 i'd rather say, since the one link gives it some degree of rotation, if you hit it with the "flat" side, it will turn to the "edge" side, and then wrap around it

@Nachtmahr79

2 жыл бұрын

@@andreas_rr That might happen, if you hit with an angle, but I doubt it, if you hit somewhere near 90° to the intended plain of rotation. In that direction, the chain is very stiff and will behave like a rigid pole - and it is just to thin to withstand that repeatedly.

I'd be curious to see a comparison of what it's like to wear this flail and a normal one. I'm wondering if this one bounces around less, banging your legs and knees less painfully.

For the twisting, I've heard that you can't actually twist a poor quality bar. So it could be there as a sign of quality.

@LarryGarfieldCrell

2 жыл бұрын

It might be an indicator of low slag, perhaps. I'm not sure but I could see that. It definitely isn't an indication of the carbon content. I've twisted mild steel and iron quite easily. If anything that's easier than twisting higher carbon steel, which is overall more durable and harder to twist. (But still quite doable when hot. See also, twisted Damascus.)

3:00 love the shoutout to Joerg Sprave!

it sounds like the part about riveting the chain was talking about riveting the rings shut rather than using rivets to connect segments of the chain and maybe also having a rivet or something else to section off part of the ring so that it cannot freely slide around but can still rotate freely. maybe kinda something like figure 8 for the chain segments.

An edge is a topological thing. So orientation of forces and strenght is an edge. The edge, being the force multiplier(application) of the weapon, if orientable provide a greater control upon force aplication. In an group, close quarter situation, this configuration is a superior tool. And, the ability to carry a quicklink and spare chain would lessen greatly the main disadventage cited.

I feel like the chain restricting lateral movement would mean a slightly more effective strike when wrapping around a shield or blocking weapon. Less energy is wasted in jostling around or twisting the chain and more is delivered into the blow. The difference might not be huge mind you, but by the time weapons were getting this much thought put into them designers were stretching for every scrap of advantage they could think of, and it might be just enough to make the difference between a solid hit and a broken shield arm or collarbone.

Is that chain design used to make the head flail around less after triking? Making the bounce back more controllable?

With regard to the durability and strength of the chain, it is worth bearing in mind that chain made from riveted/pinned plates was preferred for tensile-strength-critical applications (such as suspension bridges) well into the nineteenth century. In an era when each link of a round or oval-link chain was individually forge welded, the chain really was as weak as its weakest weld. So while a blow from the side might create a stiff or bent and locked link, or even break the chain, durability should be considered in relation to the probability of a defectively welded link (which increases with the number of links in the chain). In terms of other possible arrangements indicated by the quoted text, I first thought of a riveted stud-link chain but then imagined a chain made like a double eye chain swivel is made. Such a chain would be free to rotate, wouldn't shorten, and wouldn't lock links on itself but it also wouldn't be very flexible at all...

That original bike chain would give my derailleur a headache. As you say, a normal chain would be more durable, and certainly cheaper too. But as some of your commentors note, the extra control over the plane of return could be crucial, especially on horseback. Cheers from sunny Vienna, Scott

this chain consists of alternating single and double links. It would be trivial to twist the single links by 90° in the middle so that the opposite ends are perpendicular. This would give an easy universal joint like effect and stop lateral binding and racking of the chain thus potentially making the chain more resistant to damage

A flail is so easy to make that it almost surely was used before any metal. You only need to tie a stone to a stick with a string. For best result, you would probably want a somewhat flat pebble, drill 2 holes into it, and reinforce the string with leather where it touches the stone. You could just make a pocket around the stone, but then the pocket is going to take damage on every hit.

Just 2 weeks ago I attended an auction at hermann historica. Saw a guy bid up 2 Gold plated faucets from Ludwig 2nd of Bavaria from 5k to 36k. It was quite amazing. Not as amazing as their showroom filled to the top with amazing antiques from all ages. Eventually I will get something for myself, was outbid this time.

I mentioned this on Todd's video --- flail - shield combo. The shield deflects the opponent's weapon and allows the flail to strike quickly.

Loved this My observations, in no particular order: 1) its cheaper to manufacture than a montane. 2) more than a normal chain, where the ball has most of the damaging power, it has a whip-like effect: especially if its a longer version, anything the chain touches will be damaged...(i think) 3) useful for wrapping round shields etc. 4) useful, like a montante, against multiple opponents, using the same drills. 5) lighter than a montane. This means less fatigue 6) less fatigue = less likely to break the thing through poor edge alignment 7) cheap/easy to repair 8) possibly more useful than an edged weapon against heavily armored opponents

Perhaps Mendoza meant putting a rivet through the central portion of each link, with the end result being something like an anchor chain

@scholagladiatoria

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, it seems more like something like that to me.

One big advantage I would see with this type of chain would be making the weapon easier to control after the strike. With a normal flail the head can bounce off in nearly any direction; with this one you kind of know which way it's going to bounce since it's a directional weapon. I'd also wonder if it is less prone to tangling when parried along the chain - i.e. can you keep control of the weapon and therefore the weapon parrying it more effectively?

Maybe the thin handle was intentional to allow the force of the swing to pull it upwards so one's hand is out of range of a rebound if it's gripped too high. Gloves or gauntlets could reduce friction enough to allow it to slip in a tight grip, with the thin handle preventing a grip that's too tight. If it's self-aligning as mentioned, it would seem to make sense....

I think the edge alignment is actually a disadvantage, as you can only use a very narrow angle of attack, whereas a regular chain allows you to rotate the chain and wrap or swing around an object.

Mendoza may be describing a figure 8 chain link with a rivet in the centre, as opposed to crimp closed chain links. I don't know if welded shut links existed at the time, but if they did they'd have to be long enough to get the hammer between the two other links to strike & weld the seam, and so it could "shrink"? As with all such things, comes down to interpretation.

The text reading makes think of the sliding rivets used in armours

I can really see those one handed ones as horseman's weapons. In a cavalry melee you must have quite a lot of space, horses moving take up quite a lot of space after all. If your opponents are wearing full plate armour then you are going to need something with both a lot of range and a lot of punch at that range to actually hurt them. If you are wearing armour then being able to defend with the weapon is a secondary concern, and due to the more spaced out distribution of combatants you have plenty of space to wind up attacks.that's all fine, so why not use a regular war hammer? Because of what I think is the biggest benefit of the flail: it doesn't really transfer force back into the user. With a regular, solid shaft war hammer, every time you strike a blow the same force you deliver into your opponent is also transferred through the solid shaft, up your arm. Hit someone hard enough, or often enough and you might actually hurt yourself and at the very least you will get plenty worn out. This doesn't really happen with a flail, as the chain partially isolates your arm from the counterforce by prolonging the transfer from the point of impact to the arm. The energy transfer is the same, but the impulse is not. This gets to be very relevant on horseback. If you strike someone while passing them at speed the energy of your strike is going to be massively increased. On foot you can only put as much strength and weight into a strike as you have in your body, on horseback you have at least part of the weight of your horse behind the blow. Which is still being channeled through your still very human arm. If that energy comes through your arm all at once, as it will with a solid shaft weapon, I imagine that can really do a number on you. This is especially true if your arm is at or close to full extension, which it is more likely to be due to the longer distances between horsed opponents. At best you probably drop the weapon and numb the arm. At worst you dislocate, sprain or even fracture something. Either way you are in big trouble. But if you can extend the time during which that same force is transferred, you are probably fine. Going from 0.01 seconds of transfer time to 0.1 seconds of transfer time might not seem like a lot, but it will make a hell of a difference to your body (pulling numbers out of my ass, but the general point stands). Thus, instead of ineffectively plinking a sword off of their helmets, or literally breaking your own elbow with a warhammer or axe, you can keep bashing people's helmets in with a flail.

I think the not shortening chain could be referring to an Anchor or Marine chain. Maybe the "riveted shut" description refers to a rivet across the link to produce an Anchor chain.

I've always been fascinated by flails. First one I ever made when I was a kid was a sawed off bit of hockey stick with wooden ball (might have been the end of a bedpost I "borrowed" without permission, come to think of it) and a fairly sturdy chain between them hammered into place with a couple of U shaped nails/fence staples. Of course, I made the chain way too long, which necessitated the wearing of hockey gloves... I know I iterated on it at least a couple of more times, too. Starting with shortening that chain, lol. Because of that lifelong fascination I'm always pleased to see something about historical examples of flails since I've heard so often that they never really existed. Bike chain flail, though, wow! That's a new one!

My thought is that by keeping the swing in essentially a single plane, you would hit with maximum force, compared to a normal chain which would easily be prone in combat to have some sloppy side-to-side angular movement. I'd love to see the motion compared on something that would measure the force of the two in simulated combat, allowing comparison of the energy delivered. Just don't ask me how to go about that... Perhaps even a subjective comparison of how the hits feel would suffice, barring anything more scientific... Anyway, fascination discussion and brilliant job as always Matt.

@Nachtmahr79

2 жыл бұрын

Maybe Houston Jones has time to get hit with that thing? He could compare it to the standard flail, they used on him....

I believe that mendoza description is each individual link has a rivet in the way that each link in mail armor has a rivet.

That’s interesting the combination of the thin grip that you can’t hold well makes it so it can rotate and align with the arc of the ball and the pommel prevents you from loosing the grip. So they all work together not unlike a Golok machete.

I personaly think that maby this type of chain could offer some extra defensive options. Chopping into a attack to displaces it with a normal flail will get you only sow far since it's sure to collaps in on it's self while this flail actuely can have a riggit structure sow you can more or less swipe a attack aside in a similair manner to how you would swipe aside attacks with a stick. Having both a flexibel and rigit plane on a flail might be a advantages, but your gone have to test it out for us to be sure.

I wanna see you smash stuff with it. perhaps set up some kind of practical course like you did at the end of the pumpkin video to demonstrate the montante style techniques.

From Mendoza's description it sounds like he wants a chain that has rivets through the center of an oval link, similar to what I've seen on anchor chains. Gives me an idea for a new project...

For discussion of private collections VS museums Ian McCollum has a good video on his "forgotten weapons" channel as pertaining to firearms. I'm sure many of the same considerations will apply to older arms and armor

Only decades after Sir Walter Raleigh invented the bike, we have this beauty. Lovely. And no, I don't think this would be effective or indeed a realisitc replica as there is firstly very little evidence for actual use of a roller chain before the 1800s, secondly the manual in Spanish as read in translation is ambiguous about its design, and finally and most importantly, any force used on that chain sideways would bugger it up royally.

@dorkangel1076

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, I wondered about the torque on the chain, especially where it joins the shaft. I wonder if it was attached to a ring rather than a fixed shaft if that would help?

@jaqssmith1666

2 жыл бұрын

But that chain doesn't have rollers....

@Simon_Nonymous

2 жыл бұрын

@@jaqssmith1666 sort of yes, sort of no... what I meant to say was that this seems to me to be a copy of a roller chain which was developed/invented with a specific purpose/function, and as far as I know had no precedent before the 1800s. I am usually completely wrong though, and forgive my imprecise language.

I was thinking the same about edge alignment, but further in the video you make an interesting point with the chain getting damaged by bending sideways, I think the reason the handle was round was: because if it is able to turn in your hand more easily, it will reduce the sideways strain on the chain.

@oevr37

2 жыл бұрын

But then again if you don't align the edge properly at all, it could defenitely damage the weapon even more.

Given how common thought is that one handed flails are for mounted use, I'd love to see you do a mounted test with this and see how it handles at horse speeds.

My experience with chain drives in mechanical contexts suggests you are right about the chain snapping or breaking at a rivet. I've fixed more than I care to.

The pommel looks like it would make a good mace head.

Matt that's is a (plate chain) specifically a '' Dual & single pattern riveted stright plates'' as old as flattened metal give or take way back to ancient antiquity out of copper alloys. The sort of chains a bicycles & motor bikes use is a ''roller chain) normally inner & outer dual side plates'' Both are flat chains but very different. (Flat chain or plated chain mace) is the true terminology, not a bicycle chain. (Roller chains/''bike chains'') are for transferring motion across toothed mechanisms not for whacking things. Plate chains where likely 1st used on jewellery to my guess & knowledge. Plate chain mace matt! You can make a chain links out of anything or shape if solid enough.

@arnijulian6241

2 жыл бұрын

It just came to m matt, if interested in unusual flails you should look at byzantine flails. They use byzantine linkage pattern similar to a wheat pattern linkage, very pretty & some what ornate. most of these patterns are done in cord or leather but some where done steal, metal & such. I thought you might find this interesting as it is a sort of compromise between plate linkage & the more common ring linkages.

What types of chain were commonly available during Mendoza's time? This might bring context to his description. I believe his reference to riveted was just like maille links to keep the links closed. Also if the inner diameter of each link only has enough room for the thickness of the links it is attached to, then there is no room for compression in the chain. This might cause more stress and require a riveted link instead of just butted.

It sounds like mendoza is describing a chain that has ring links with rivets not unlike riveted mail, and a chain of that sort would have a tendency to bind up as he describes

I think you should try extending the chain perpendicular to the handle and try spinning the shaft to swing or when swinging to see if this might be good for quick hits or add more power to already powerful hits. It might work like a whip if done like this and then snapping forward could in theory add more power. I think this could be why the handle is round and so thin as it might be designed to be able to be spun.

Leonardo da Vinci has similar chains in the Codex Atlanticus (circa 1490) - so the chain type was known in period, at least.

I would love to see a picture of the original from Auction as the idea of there being a bike style chain In The 1500s or 1600s blows my mind, purely as it means they were so close to a technological breakthrough if they had only thought about cogs to fit with it. Is it certain through artifacts that this was the case? From the description you read from Mendoza I felt that it sounded like the links were Individually riveted so perhaps even a flat link chain in a traditional way but with rivets to hold each link tight. Traditionally what is the process to weld or solder a steel chain in the 1500s? Mendoza also seemed to suggest the chain was made in a imilar way to how a traditional flail head was attached so perhaps that would be a good place to look Into exactly what he meant? Keep up the excellent work. I love your videos before bed! Thanks for all your efforts. 😊

I like to watch your channel first in these collaborations Matt

It would be super interesting to see it in action in a bit of simulation. Like could that chain bite into a wood shaft and wrap reliable enough that the wrapping was an option with this style of chain? Also it doesn't have to be much but some plywood and or some basic sheet steel with something behind to get an idea of how much force did it require to be effective. Thats hard to see in sparing and for a blunt weapon it's going to change how you fight it.

I made 2 very similar in design flails when I learn to weld with bike chain, one with very similar preparations as they then one with a longer shaft and shorter chain and that second one I found alot better to use.

My thought is that it's a little bit more predictable if you only have to worry about it bouncing off of the target in 2 directions instead of it bouncing off in 360 degrees. Maybe easier to deal with if you're less trained in the use of a flail. I know I've accidentally had a flail wrap over a shield when I was really too close and it bounced back directly into the side of my own helmet. Of course I've never used one like this, it would be interesting to see if it helps in that way at all.

pretty sure Stevie Nicks sang about this: "I can still hear you saying You would never break the chain (Never break the chain)"

I wonder if the chain Mendoza is talking about is a typical chain with oval links basically a rivet connecting the 2 flats of each link, acting as a divider in between the other 2 links attached to it. Seems like that would prevent it collapsing, but not sure how feasible that would be.

Could you start the swing with the chain travelling link plates first, then snap to the flexible position just prior to impact with the target, or indeed a parry? The wind up could be quicker as during the wind up it's essentially rigid. That could explain the cylindrical grip, or more likely it's just the usual flail grip where orientation is not as important.

That pommel is gorgeous!

Mendonza's description doesn't sound like a bicycle chain, it sounds like an anchor chain (stud link chain). The stud in the middle of the links, prevents the chain from collapsing within the link, makes the link stronger (and heavier) and I suppose that it can be done with rivets, assuming that the translation is correct. Maybe the text should read stud instead of rivet. In spanish rivet would be remache but stud link in spanish sometimes is referred as link with rivet (eslabon con remache). Stud is not a word that has a good translation from spanish, stud link chains are usually called anchor chains (cadena de ancla). Some of the words that would be used in spanish for a stud (in a link) are: contrete, espiga, gorrón, clavo de adorno, espárrago, pasador, perno, prisionero, puntal, remache. None of them would readily translate to stud without the context of being in a link (eslabón)

The greatest advantage of this chain is that you clearly know the side which hits the target. So instead of spinning cube they should attach smth like chisel (not spinning off course). And then penetration capabilities if this weapon would be incredible! It would probably crack helms.

There is a picture in Mendoza's treatise that shows a flail, and it's chains, despite not beeing very detailed, certainly doesn't look like a bike chain. About it's use, Ton Puey, a Galician HEMA instructor has it covered in various videos in the channel of his school, Academia da espada

I don't think the durability of the weapon was a significant factor in this case. It is a specialised weapon, so the use is already sparser. The period is also later, when steel production (the raw material and goods made of it) and access is in a rather advanced stage compared to the medieval era before it (hence the whole thing made of steel rather than a cheaper wood shaft). And as you pointed out, the people this was more likely used by already carried multiple weapons onto the field. If for some reason it broke on their occasional use, the proper soldier would likely just ask their aide to toss them one of the other weapons; this also implies they can afford all these weapons and replacements. Militarily, weapons are ultimately consumables. As long as the weapon lasts enough to do its intended job when drawn out, what you're really caring about is the supply chain i.e. logistics. Making individual weapons outlast as many battles as possible is just one way to control the consumption rate so that production&delivery rate >= consumption rate. But if the left hand side of the equation already does that, then it becomes just a secondary concern/bonus.

The chain links are pinned so no separating, than a larger pin is pressed center of link pushing the attached links to the ends keeping them from collapsing in on each other.

I still have the question if this flail has the posibility of "moving" the arc either for adjusting the aim or making a parry. What I mean is that a normal flails path is pretty much set when you impart momentum on it. If you make an over head swing from high right to low left you cant change the path to mid left without the head begining to move towards yourself (shortening your stroke and making accuracy improbable), this chain has the possibility of changing the path of momentum in such a move, just becoase the chain denies the head the possibility to bend towards you because of the "edge alignment"

That description sounded like it might be describing riveted mail style chain links, to me. That doesn't seem imminently practical, but I would be interested to know if that is a reasonable way to process the original language, and if so, if such a chain would work.

Was Mendoza talking about a cross between a chain and jointed flail, like longer and heavier fixed rotating links? Whatever it is it doesn't seem like a normal chain. The piece in the video might be a well executed modern repro by someone reading Mendoza who knew motorcycle chains were used in gang fights.

My guess is that it was simpler to make as a rivetted piece than a regular chain and that they wanted it to be less likely to contract and wrap around things multiple times.

Does Mendzoza mention the lenght of the chain itself? Because a two handed flail more like the hussite or agricultural designs would use a lot less links (maybe just half) and would essentially give you a flail you can hold extended at full lenght by simply flipping it on the side AND reduce the stress on the links and the likelyhood of the chain itself being hit.

This piece looks beautiful! But, if you make it in your workshop, from junk laying around - you'll have Mad Max style flail! And I have a feeling there's big German dude who's working on it as I type this...

Thank you for posting the dimensions. Very cool recreation! Weapons breaking was nothing unusual, chains break, swords break, hafts break, etc. The chain is easily repairable. In period combat, it would be no different from your sword breaking, hopefully you survive long enough to pck up another weapon from a comrade or enemy who has no longer a need for his.

Google tells me the push roller chain was invented in 1880.....so I'm thinking your comment about individual normal chain rings being riveted shut was spot on....too early for a bike type chain. Happy to be proved wrong obviously.

I believe the weight at the end is a Cuboctahedron, a cube with the corners cut off more closely describes a truncated cube

@andrewprahst2529

2 жыл бұрын

It depends how much you cut them off. When you cut the corners off all the way so that the new corners meet in one place, it's called rectification. A cuboctahedron is a rectified cube (or a rectified octahedron). Or more simply, either of these shapes with their corners cut off all the way

I wonder if the first link was extended, the haft couldn't incorporate a short spike the link "straddles" to allow a limited thrusting ability?

Maybe the historical German mace originally had a regular chain that broke, and someone in the modern era repaired it with a bike chain?

Playing Stronghold HD while watching this. "We are the mace men!"

This is a learner's flail. A true master of the shaft and ball would graduate to one with normal chains as a master would never be accidently on the receiving end.

You mentioned edge alignment: could it be used to tangle and grab an opponent's weapon? So it would be both a weapon and a swordbreaker. A question for Tod: why alternate single links with double links on the chain? Was that the same as the historical piece? ISTM that double links all the way down would be stronger against breakage.

@Glimmlampe1982

2 жыл бұрын

The original had links like this. In Tods video he has a screenshot of the original

@foldionepapyrus3441

2 жыл бұрын

Seems to me the links themselves are not going to be the weakest point, so doubling the links just adds mass where you don't really want it for little structural gain. The riveted heads or the pivots themselves aught to fail first, with the size head we can see on the rivet I'd expect the pivot pins to be thinner diameter than the plate link parts are thick, and rivet heads can be pulled through - they are only going to be a thin overhang around the pivot holes and whichever rivet head is weakest will have all the leverage of the rest of the chain working against it.