Armour?

[Ahriman]

Oi!
As I've written before, I'm an armourer, with quite limited resources in my favourite area. As I'm writing this here, you can guess what's that area... :D

So, I'd like to ask you to post as much pictures/drawings of armour from outside europe, especially from the middle-east, India, and the moro region.

And one more thing. I made a demigauntlet for a buyer who wanted eastern looks, flexibility, and durability. The result is attached. I'd like to know if it had ever exist, and if so, where? I'd bet 16th century turkish or persian.
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/14987302.jpg

Last thing. Is it possible that such thing existed? It's still unfinished, but even then... I bet you can answer me.
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/15042568.jpg
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/15042570.jpg
Almost forgot: in the end, it'll have open sides with laces + more plates to the back instead of that "aventail". Stomach area will be moved upwards, and a moro-like skirt will be added. Whole thing will be polished.

[fearn]

Hi Ahriman,

Neat armor. As for the practicality, I'd suggest a simple test: get someone to take a stick to you while you wear it (I won't suggest a sword or a baseball bat). While it's neat, I'm not sure I'd like to wear something that leaves spine and solar plexus so exposed. Getting whacked with something non-lethal might be useful, simply to let you know whether it protects what you want it to protect, at a level you're comfortable with.

F

[Ahriman]

Thanks!
Tried out.. with sword... back area is a problem, but I know that already... :) The plate sections take full blow without padding very-very well, but the mail components would require the padding. BTW, the plates on the BP are 3.5mm thick, the wire is 2.5mm. Solar plexus will be a bit more protected when I move the abdomen plate up.
But would it have been possible historically?

[Mark]

It does look Indo-Persian. With the variety there is in plate-and-mail armor its possible that something looked like this. In my limited experience I haven't seen any with plates of those shapes, though.

[Tim Simmons]

You have covered your nipples and belly but I could stick my lattest mail piercing Telek right into your heart. Tim

[Aqtai]

Nice work there :). The arm-guard looks like a distant relative of a Turco-Iranian bazu band. Although I vaguely remember an Indian vambrace with a similar structure from somewhere. The mail and plate cuirass has a similar structure to a 16th century Turco-Iranian Krug, however the shapes of the actual components are different. Islamic oriental mail and plate armours tended to prefer more geometric shapes like circles, rectangles and squares.

Here is a 17th century Turkish vambrace or bazu-band (from the Karlsruher Turkenbeute collection). Most contemporary Iranian and Indian vambraces would have had a similar construction but a different style of decoration. Vambraces of this type were used in the middle-east from the late 15th century to the early 19th century.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Turkish_vambrace_17th_C.jpg

This is a 16th century Ottoman krug or korazin from the Royal armouries in Leeds. This type of armour was probably used from the early 16th to the late 17th century in Iran, the Ottoman Empire and Russia. In Iran and India the Krug was superceded by the chahar-ayna cuirass in the late 16th century.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Turkish_korazin-16th_C.jpg

This is another type of mail-and-plate armour, variants of this were used in the Mamluk Sultanate, Ottoman Empire, Iran, India and Russia from the late 14th to late 18th century AD. This particular example is Turkish and is in the Royal armouries in Leeds:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Turkish_mail-and-plate_069.jpg

Finally if you haven't got these two books already then I would recommend them. They're a bit old fashioned and occasionally downright out-dated, but they're cheap (especially if you buy them second-hand from abebooks.com) and have lots of pictures, so they are a good starting point:
http://store.yahoo.com/doverpublications/0486407268.html
http://store.yahoo.com/doverpublications/0486418189.html

[rasdan]

Hi Ahriman,

I think the the wire diameter of 2.5mm (12ga if i'm right) is too big and ring diameter also is a bit large. What i see normally in a Moro armour they would use a 14ga wire with a diameter of 5/16" for the suit and 12ga wire with a diameter of perhaps 3/8" for rings connecting the plates. The plates are also a bit thick. I thought 2.5mm thick would be adequate. But, well, this is only my observations, i dont have the experience of making one myself.


Btw, i have a few questions. Do u cut your rings by yourself? What material is the rings? Can u please tell us, how do u make the plates curve? Do u use a stamping machine or a hammer?

Regards,
Rasdan

[Ahriman]

Thanks for the good pictures, especially the krug, and the comments!

I forgot to add a few infos about that cuirass: the photos are more than a year old, while the cuirass was an absolute side project in the last 2 years. I've drawn the patterns for the plates directly onto the steel free-handedly, and I, indeed, made the armpit too vulnerable. I'm currently planning the next version with more krug-ish lines, but with keeping the "musculata" feeling. Oh, and I didn't know anything about the krug back then... And it was my first-ever m&p stuff. Even then, I'd like to finish it with elbow lenght sleeves.

Tim: I know, you're quite right, but back then, I thought that I'd need such a big armpit for mobility. I was wrong. :D The mentioned sleeves'll help a bit, but won't solve the problem fully. The next one will be better for sure.

It seems to me that the eastern people tended to have quite thin arms - I haven't really seen any bazuband that could fit to my arm. This seems strange because they were fighting and shooting arrows most of their lifetime... Or am I wrong?

[Ahriman]

I use only hammers for platework. I hate machining tools excluding the angle-grinder, the drill, and that huge thing that can rotate metal (I don't know it's english name).
Yes, it's indeed VERY thick. From mild steel, 1.5-2 mm would've been enough, from tempered spring steel, 1.2 mm would've been overkill already. Wire thickness is due to the hungarian demands - be it cheap and durable. Cheapness rules out riveted mail, durability rules out anything under 12ga.. And I'm almost famous for the strenght of my stuff.
Rings are steel and, of course, cold drawn, which makes it better. I coiled and cut them with that huge thing etc, and my angle grinder.
Another pictures, not eastern, but it proves that I use hammers.... ;) It's a half-done musculata with less than 5 hours of work in it, with planning-patterning.
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/14987300.jpg
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/14987301.jpg

[Aqtai]

That lorica musculata looks pretty good after just 5 hours work, is it bronze? :)

On the subject of mail, it's my understanding that mail was usually made from iron rather than steel, there were good sound reasons for this apparently. If I remember rightly if struck, a steel ring was more likely to break where as an iron ring would deform, but not break.

I would't worry too much about the armpits being exposed on the krug-style cuirass, AFAIK the krug, like the chahar aina, was meant to be worn over a mail shirt.

I still haven't found the bazubands I mentioned, but I'm sure I've seen one like yours somewhere. Here are a pair of Iranian bazubands circa 1700 from the Royal Armouries:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/RA_Iranian_bazuband_1700.jpg

With regards to what you said about the size of bazubands, I encountered the same thing with a tulwar I recently bought, the hilt was too small for my hand. I can only surmise that the average Turk/Iranian/Indian circa 1400-1800 was smaller than most modern Europeans.

Solid plate bazubands were also used in India, like this example from "The Arts of War, Arms and Armour of the 7th to 19th centuries, The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art, VOL XXI" by David Alexander. These often look a bit bigger.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Vambraces_India_18th_C.jpg

[Ahriman]

Sorry, the iron-steel thing is my fault. I've learned physics and chemistry, and I worked a year with a machinist. Everywhere I was told that there's no thing like iron wire, or iron plate, because 100% ferrum is absolutely useless... and every iron-based metal which has other components is steel. In this case, the rings are from "mild steel", which is called iron by MOST people. They're technically wrong, but there're only a few idiots like me and my teachers who know this - and I'm triing very hard to be clear, but it's quite difficult when the same thing has a million names.

Much more serious case is that here in Hungary I can't even describe a sword well, as even the semi-experienced folks know only that a "kard" is everything which is straight and longer than a feet, and a "szablya" is everything which is curved... Try telling them it's a yataghan, a shamshir, or a curved kindjal... :mad: :mad:

No, it's not bronze - it's way too expensive to use it for side projects. This musculata was amongst the first pieces for which I actually did patterns and calculations other than eye measure. I haven't worked on it like a month.

will post more tomorrow.

[Battara]

Rasdan is impressively correct about the Moro dimensions. They often used bronze or brass chain-maille, 4-in-1 pattern for conneting the plates. Your's also looks 4-in-1, and you might want to consider brass, which is cheaper and more easy to work. I will start working on restoring my Moro armor in a little bit, repairing the plates and mending the chain-maille (with the exception of the American bullet holes :eek: ). You may also want to check out the armor section of swordforum.com as another source, and do a search there on chain-maille. Like your work on the Greek(?) body plating.

[rasdan]

Hi all,

While we are on this topic, i am curious. How does the moro attach the hinges of their armour? Is there an extra middle plate inside the armour that holds that thing that holds the armour lock? The attched picture shows a picture of a bugis armour which is strikingly similar to the moro ones. It is donated by a man of bugis descendants in Muar, Johor in 1924 to a museum in KL.

[Alam Shah]

Hi Rasdan,

It is locked into position by 2 metal plates which secure the left and right plates together. One for the top and another for the bottom. See links for examples.
Simple locking mechanism.
http://www.eriksedge.com/PH116.jpg

Another variation used by Datuks.
http://home.earthlink.net/~federicomalibago/_uimages/MoroArmor.jpg

[rasdan]

Hi Shah,

What i meant is, how the 'rod' for the lock is fixed. In this following picture, we can see that the plates are made of horn, and the 'rod' is brass. How does the brass 'rod' fixed onto the horn plate? I suspect the horn only has holes for the 'rod' and the 'rod' was made separately and welded onto a piece of centre brass plate inside the armour and then fixed with the lock. The extra inner middle plate also can protect the body if the thrust goes directly in the middle of the chest plates. (Just my opinion). We can see the missing 'rod' from the second picture below. Can anybody clear this up?

Thanks,
Rasdan

[Aqtai]

I knew I had seen a picture of vambraces similar to the ones you made somewhere. This pic is from G.C. Stones venerable and somewhat outdated "Glossary of the Construction, Decoration, and Use of Arms and Armor in All Countries and in All Times". Unfortunately Stone doesn't mention when these vambraces were made and in what part of India where they used.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Splinted_Vambraces_Stone_1.jpg

This picture is also from the same book, surprisingly it's the only picture I have that shows the back of a krug:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Krug_Ottoman_Stone_1.jpg

[Alam Shah]

Rasdan,

The rings may be a modification, for a quick easy release mechanism.

[rasdan]

Ic, thanks Shah :)

Hi Ahriman,

Love your work on the plates. Finishing the armour would give more or less same muscle built as the one on the plates. :D

[Ahriman]

Thanks! :D (((Then buy some ;) :D )))
Nice pictures, thanks again! I know that most of you are familiar with these... but I couldn't find them earlier... And it's a good thing to have them in one place, isn't it? (((This means: post even more!!! :) )))
I was thinking. Would it be possible to make a modified krug? I mean, I like it, I have made one already, but I'd prefer a smaller disc, and a bit higher, so it could cover the solar plexus. Um, it'd look almost like a zertsalo, just with m&p construction. So, full circle: would it be "authentic"? (If it was hard to understand, I can post a drawing.)

Vambraces: nice, but I still lack the full metacarpal. Is it because it's my modern idiotism, or it was rare, or what..?

Arm sizes: it'd be OK if it would be to scale. I mean, hand smaller, arms smaller, ok, but the proportions are still not ok. My wrist circumference is 18cm, and my lower arm circumference at the thickest is more than 42cm. Now, I wasn't training for a long time, I'm not a regular archer, I prefer two-handed weapons, and still... I simply can't believe that a full-time warrior can have such a tiny arm. Even the most flaring vambrace on the pics have about 1/1.5=1,666 wrist/thick area ratio, while 42/18=2,333, and it's AFTER the non-training period.

One thing occured to me though: isn't it possible that these were the possessions of the upper classes, and were mostly decorative? I mean, if it has silver on it, repousse, etc, it's not likely that it's owner was a full-time fighter, who don't care much for politics. Or am I, again, and idiot?

[Aqtai]

...I was thinking. Would it be possible to make a modified krug? I mean, I like it, I have made one already, but I'd prefer a smaller disc, and a bit higher, so it could cover the solar plexus. Um, it'd look almost like a zertsalo, just with m&p construction. So, full circle: would it be "authentic"? (If it was hard to understand, I can post a drawing.)

Vambraces: nice, but I still lack the full metacarpal. Is it because it's my modern idiotism, or it was rare, or what..?

Arm sizes: it'd be OK if it would be to scale. I mean, hand smaller, arms smaller, ok, but the proportions are still not ok. My wrist circumference is 18cm, and my lower arm circumference at the thickest is more than 42cm. Now, I wasn't training for a long time, I'm not a regular archer, I prefer two-handed weapons, and still... I simply can't believe that a full-time warrior can have such a tiny arm. Even the most flaring vambrace on the pics have about 1/1.5=1,666 wrist/thick area ratio, while 42/18=2,333, and it's AFTER the non-training period.

One thing occured to me though: isn't it possible that these were the possessions of the upper classes, and were mostly decorative? I mean, if it has silver on it, repousse, etc, it's not likely that it's owner was a full-time fighter, who don't care much for politics. Or am I, again, and idiot?

Hi Ahriman,
I'm not sure what you mean about the "krug" disc being modified. The disc already covers the entire abdomen and part of the chest as well. The zertsalo is just the Russian version of the krug, in fact krug itself is a Russian word. This type of armour was used in Turkey, Iran and Russian the 16th and 17th centuries so there was probably a lot of variation already. In fact Islamic/Oriental armour was made by a single craftsman working with a group of apprentices not mass produced in a factory, so I doubt that any two krugs would be identical.

As for the bazubands being small, I don't understand it either, but I doubt all the examples we have are all purely decorative. Many of these must have been made for combat, yes many may have been made for high-ranking officers or for elite guard units, but even these chaps would get involved in combat if the battle went the wrong way. :D It's possible also we have completely misunderstood the way these things were worn.

I'm not sure what you mean by the metacarpal either. Turkish and Iranian bazubands often had mail "mittens" attached while Indian bazubands (known as dastanas) either had mail mittens or padded fabric mittens. :)

Anyway I'll throw in a few more of my photos:

First a pair of Indian dastanas from the Victoria and Albert Museum in London:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/VA_Dastana_18th_C.jpg

A partial 16th century Ottoman krug from the Royal Armouries museum:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/RAAugust05005.jpg

An 18th century Iranian armour set. I can't remember if this this set is early or late 18th century. The difference is important. Armour made before 1750 is more like to be functional armour designed for combat and the mail links are rivetted, whereas armour made after about 1750 is usually ceremonial and mail components are invariably unriveted.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/IraniancharainaRAAugust05010.jpg

Lastly an 18th century Sindi armour from the Royal Armouries:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Sindi_Armour_094.jpg

[Ahriman]

My fault again... I meant metacarpal plate. I know about the mittens, but that'd be far from enough... especially if there's the possibility of meeting a hammer, a club, an axe... Not to mention a two-hander sword. :D

With them being small, I meant that even MY arm has a wrist/thickest part circumference ratio of 18/42, which is quite far from these vambraces. They don't widen enough for a muscular arm, which would be normal for an archer-swordsman. The last one you posted is getting closer if I see it correctly, but MOST of these are... small, and it's strange to me. If you still can't understand my rambling, learn hungarian so I can explain it in my mother language... ;)

About the zertsalo-krug thing, I thought the same, but thoughts like this often cause me trouble... For example I don't understand why would a Berserk*-ish armour impossible in the 16th century, Germany. Grotesque, fluted, working. Then...?
* I mean the manga, not the viking bastard. :)

[Ahriman]

Forgot to add. Thanks for the pictures... where are they from? I mean, the photos, not the pieces. Are these yours? If so, you're far luckier than me... :( I'm planning to visit ANY of these museums since... well, since I was 8. That was long ago.
For the char-ai-na set, I'd bet late period. The links are very small, and unless it's a masterpiece, it's impossible to be rivetted. You see, there's little to no uneveness in the aventail, while a rivet or the widened rivet base would cause such effect. It's too smooth. BUT if it's rivetted, I'm going to visit it even if I had to walk there. That'd mean EXTREMELY fine work. Hm, but then, it'd be the suit of a VERY wealthy person...
Thanks for the Sind armour... I've seen only 2 pictures of them before this. Could you please give me more info about them? Or at least point me to the good direction?

And a last thing: is there a picture showing close-up on the repousse work of the full krug armour down there? It seems beautiful... But it's a rather small picture.

Thanks!

[Ahriman]

Just now, in an email, I've received a link, where I've found this picture.
http://hindunet.org/saraswati/gauntlets.jpg
Now, I think that #5 and #11 is too familiar. It seems to me that they could be theoretically joined with the #3 down on this page, which Aqtai posted. I know that neither of the show signs of connection, but the familiar design is strange to me. COULD have been there a connection between India and Japan? More precisely, is it possible that the Japans had acces to Indian stuff? Because, if so, we'd have a clear link. (at least, I think) And it'd result in a plate mitten, with plate wirst lame, and mail connection between the wirst, metacarpal, and vambrace plates.
I do know it's a crazy theory, but what do you think?

[Aqtai]

Forgot to add. Thanks for the pictures... where are they from? I mean, the photos, not the pieces. Are these yours? If so, you're far luckier than me... :( I'm planning to visit ANY of these museums since... well, since I was 8. That was long ago.
For the char-ai-na set, I'd bet late period. The links are very small, and unless it's a masterpiece, it's impossible to be rivetted. You see, there's little to no uneveness in the aventail, while a rivet or the widened rivet base would cause such effect. It's too smooth. BUT if it's rivetted, I'm going to visit it even if I had to walk there. That'd mean EXTREMELY fine work. Hm, but then, it'd be the suit of a VERY wealthy person...
Thanks for the Sind armour... I've seen only 2 pictures of them before this. Could you please give me more info about them? Or at least point me to the good direction?

And a last thing: is there a picture showing close-up on the repousse work of the full krug armour down there? It seems beautiful... But it's a rather small picture.

Thanks!

The photos were all taken by myself a few months ago at the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds, it is the closest Museum to where I live and as far as I know one of the last remaining big public collections of of Oriental armour in England that is still open. The V&A closed their main arms and armour collection and the only the few pieces remaining in the South Asia section can now be seen by the public. The Wallace Collection is also open, but exhibits mainly later Indian and Iranian armour, it has no Turkish stuff and doesn't allow photography. I'm afraid I wasn't particularly interested in the damaged krug at the time as there was an intact krug next to it. So that's the biggest photo i have of it. :)

I've placed a lot of my Royal Armoury photos on the User-submitted photos section of the myarmoury.com website.
http://www.myarmoury.com/albums/thumbnails.php?album=50&page=1

[Ahriman]

Sorry, I meant that picture from the book... I can see the damaged one's repousse well enough. :)
That's sad... but less sad than our country... one of our museums has about 50 japanase weapons... displays 0... has more than 100 katars... displays 0... has late-period japanase full armours... display 0... I'm VERY mad at them. :mad:

[Aqtai]

OK I understand, I'm afraid I don't have a more detailed picture, it was scanned from G. C. Stones' "Glossary...", which is why the quality isn't great. All I can do is link you to a slightly bigger scan:
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/9461/krugottomanstone0ep.jpg

About those Japanese laminated gauntlets, I have seen Turkish and Iranian armours with laminated vambraces that extended down to the knuckles. Unfortunately the only picture I have of one these, is a rather poor quality picture from Robinson's "Oriental Armour" of a 15th century Turkish armour, now in the Metropolitan Museum in New York.
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/276/hrrobinsonplvi1017zh.jpg

It has to be said though these laminated vambraces look suspiciously like greaves. I saw this armour in the Met about four years ago, it has now been placed on an equestrian figure, and the vambraces are no longer there.

A reconstruction of this armour is also on the front cover of an Osprey Men-At-Arms book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0850455111/ref=sib_rdr_zmin/202-0812991-1464659?p=S001&j=1#reader-page

[Ahriman]

Damn, I was looking for this suit for ages! :)
Yes, I see that most of these pictures are from books... :(

I don't think that it'd be greave... where'd you put that "metacarpal"-like plate? It's shaped rather oddly for a sabaton... and it's too short. If the author'd've mentioned something about this... :mad:
BTW, I found an interesting vambrace at rubens.anu.edu.au. It has that widening I missed before, and is quite like the one on the met suit, only that it's shorter. But if we take into consideration that it's made from 3 plates which couldn't compress, while the met one in made from stripes... Hm. And it's too high for a greave, and if I'm correct, the turkish armour fashion used m&p cuisses with mail demi-greaves, which'd cover about the third or half of the greave. So such a high greave would be a waste of metal and would needlessly increase the weight.
There's a quite simple way to get proof... I'm in need for a full eastern harness... so I think, as I have the picture of it now, I'll build THIS for myself at last. If the vambrace works, good, if not... then we're looking for very-very long legs... :D

[Ahriman]

Damn, I forgot. This is the mentioned vambrace. (http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid4/turkey/istanbul/museums/military/arms_and_armour/body_armour/index1.html)

[Aqtai]

If you are talking about the 5th picture along, the one that looks like this:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Greave_Iranian_1.jpg

I'm sorry to say it is a greave. Oriental greaves strap to the outside of the leg. :)

If you have a look at the picture of the mannequin wearing the full armour with the krug cuirass, you can just make them out.

Here is photo I took of one at the Royal Armouries museum.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/R.jpg

Here is a complete greave and cuisse assembly. It's from that Osprey book on Ottoman Armies.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Cuisse_and_Greave_Ottoman_1.jpg

Here's a 15th century Turkish cuisse as well.
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Cuisse_ottoman_15th-16th_C.jpg

BTW, that's a nice website you found there. There is a partial embossed krug on the first page.

[Ahriman]

Lol, I thought I should beleive the museum... Makes sense as a greave, if I look it that way. But then how's that that even the turkish museum says it's a vambrace??? :confused:

[Aqtai]

Lol, I thought I should beleive the museum... Makes sense as a greave, if I look it that way. But then how's that that even the turkish museum says it's a vambrace??? :confused:

I think for a long time European curators did think they were vambraces, the reason was they were used to European greaves worn on the front of the leg, the idea of one worn on the side was alien to them. From the point of view of the Turks and Iranians it made perfect sense. Warriors who wore armour were cavalry men. The inside of the leg was protected by the horse, only the outside needed armour.

[B.I]

i think you have both hit a long-standing debate, and one that has not entered the forum before (as far as i know).
i'm afraid it has no answer, but the general consensus is that it is a vambrace (and i agree). its all down to opinion, as either corner can offer up a plausable arguement.
mine has always been asthetics, in that as a vambrace its effective and does the job. as a greave, its ill-fitting (at any angle) and looks ugly and out of place.
as i said, its only my opinion. the stibbert museum has them on the legs and i never thought it looked right. armour was used for both cavalry and infantry, so i cant agree on the 'side of the leg showing' theory. also, no good warrior would rely on remaining horsed and leave themselves vulnerable if un-horsed (i guess).
the problem is in the existance of splintered, small plates, and complete plates style of ottoman armour. i figured this was why stibbert mounted his dummies in the way he did as his mail/plate vambraces couldnt be anything but, so he figured that the solid plate guard had to be a grieve.
all speculative and a matter of opinion i'm afraid (but, no reason to stop debating :-)
i hold firm to my theories though (unfortunately, as does everyo ne else).
i must admit, i thought it was only the stibbert that had them mounted on the legs. i think the ones on the met complete armour are different (and dont have the 'hand-shield section). i have only seen images so may be wrong.
no idea where the ones on the 'complete leg' in the osprey book is from. does it have a reference?

[Aqtai]

Hi Brian, I'm glad you could join in.

The one from the Osprey book used to be in the Royal Armouries when they were still in the Tower of London. I actually saw it in 1989, but didn't bother photographing it. The two pieces are still in the Royal armouries, but they have now been separated.

My personal argument for it being a greave is the bit at the lower end, the one which I assume is meant to cover the ankle. If this was a vambrace it would be covering the back of the hand, excellent protection but also restricting wrist movements.

Somewhere in my papers is an old B&W picture I photocopied from an old book on Islamic art, it shows a helmet, bazuband and greave/vambrace thingy attributed to Shah Abbas 1st (all of which presumably are still in the British Museum). In this rather old photo they all seemed to be part of a matching set, which raises the question why would a single set of armour need two different types of vambrace?

[ham]

Gentlemen,

These are unquestionably greaves. Having tried on several in various collections, I can assure you that they fit the outer calf from just below the knee and completely cover the ankle, as they should for a cavalryman.
Further, they are entirely rigid in the flat plane and so would not permit the wrist to bend, nor do they fit comfortably along the ulna. Despite the size (though there is considerable variance) they are virtually always too long to even fit from elbow to knuckle.

Sincerely,

Ham

[Ahriman]

I was told on numerous events that never say "never", or "unquestionably". :) And BTW, it's listed as vambrace in a TURKISH museum... in Ankara.
I have made something like the pic I posted, and it was comfortable for fighting with sabers, and it restricted only a bit movement, less than an italian mitten. Of course, it wouldn't be fixed to the hand, but to the lower arm only.
BUT it'd work as a greave as well. I personally don't like the idea much as I don't really like fighting from horseback, but it'd work for those who like it. Strange thing is that most of these "greaves" DO look like my forearm in proportions - much more than the "true" vambraces. Only a few are too long, and the RA photo of the assembled version is the only one which looks definitely like a greave to me.
I'm almost sure that we'll never find out. Or do we have any illustrations/sculptures/explicit writings? And from where the turkish museum thought it's a vambrace? Good questions, I think.

[Aqtai]

I'm going to agree with Ham on this. The evidence for it being a greave is much stronger than the evidence for it being a vambrace. furthermore if you look at the main plate of one of these things sideways on you will note there two distinctive curves or "bumps". The bigger one near the top should fit over the lateral aspect of the calf very nicely, the smaller curve at the bottom would go over the lateral malleolus (ankle bone).

Although they mainly cover the side of the leg, the front is not completely unprotected as the narrow strip connected by mail should partially cover the shin. In addition these greaves would have been worn over sturdy leather boots.

Museums have often got things wrong in the past, the Askeri Muze or Topkapi Museums in Istanbul (I presume the photos came from one of these museums) are no exception.

The one in the RA, although now separated from the cuisse, is still labelled as a "Greave". :)

[Aqtai]

Here is a picture of that 15th century Turkish armour from "Oriental Armour" as it looks now. Unfortunately it's a small photo lacking in detail.
http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/knights/gal_isl2.html

What I think can just about about make out though is that the "vambraces" in Robinson's picture seem to have become "greaves".

My wife's always wanted to go to New York, maybe I'll get a chance to see this again in the near future, once we get someone to babysit 3 kids all aged less than 10! :D

[B.I]

i too agree that to use the term 'unquestionably' is just asking for trouble.
i have no interest in the martial or religious aspect of arms, and so when i study or inspect, i do so from an 'antiques' point of view.
i felt urged to respond to hams statement, but thought it best to wait a short while, to prove my point to myself before bowling in. i visited a friend of mine, who as a good collection of ottoman armour. on the phone, we discussed this point and he completely agreed with me. between us, we have handled many and whilst my taste is always indian, he does own a few sets and a couple of single 'vambraces'.
so, i visited him and he chuckled at ham committing himself so forcefully, all the way up to putting them onto our legs (never done in the antiques world - much frowned upon is the wearing of antiques :-) and they fitted perfectly. this was to both our amazement as we were so confident in our initial judgement. because he owned a few sets, we were able to repeat the experiment and there left no doubt in our minds that we were wrong.
i must say he was more in shock than i. as it is his specialist field :-) but we were both happy to admit out misjudgement, and laugh about it.
its funny, i fight against pre-judgement and following without questioning and it seems we are all guilty of it.
this doesnt proeve that your opinion (aqtai and ham) is correct, but it means my friend and i are now on your side :-)
apologies, and humble, as ever.

[Aqtai]

i too agree that to use the term 'unquestionably' is just asking for trouble.
i have no interest in the martial or religious aspect of arms, and so when i study or inspect, i do so from an 'antiques' point of view.
i felt urged to respond to hams statement, but thought it best to wait a short while, to prove my point to myself before bowling in. i visited a friend of mine, who as a good collection of ottoman armour. on the phone, we discussed this point and he completely agreed with me. between us, we have handled many and whilst my taste is always indian, he does own a few sets and a couple of single 'vambraces'.
so, i visited him and he chuckled at ham committing himself so forcefully, all the way up to putting them onto our legs (never done in the antiques world - much frowned upon is the wearing of antiques :-) and they fitted perfectly. this was to both our amazement as we were so confident in our initial judgement. because he owned a few sets, we were able to repeat the experiment and there left no doubt in our minds that we were wrong.
i must say he was more in shock than i. as it is his specialist field :-) but we were both happy to admit out misjudgement, and laugh about it.
its funny, i fight against pre-judgement and following without questioning and it seems we are all guilty of it.
this doesnt proeve that your opinion (aqtai and ham) is correct, but it means my friend and i are now on your side :-)
apologies, and humble, as ever.

I would call it a bit of experimental archaeology... :D

It is definitely further evidence to support the "greave" argument. Oh BTW, I'm deeply envious of your friend. :)

[ham]

Gentlemen,

As a scholar, I agree it is dangerous to make such definite statements; my intention in doing so was to stimulate thought and hopefully, to compel someone out there to try a practical application, which happily, it has.
Basing or assuming the correctness of a museum display on its nation of origin, as a member has done above, is likewise dangerous-- beginners especially would be well advised to avoid this at all costs. However rather than criticise museums which shows these calf plates as armguards (and there are a great many,) I would say simply that there are very few specialists who actually apply critical reasoning to the field. Among the best are the Topkapi Palace Museum, Istanbul, the Royal Armouries, Leeds and the arms and armour section of the Met Museum, New York.

Sincerely,

Ham

[Ahriman]

Sorry, I mostly believe the museum which has the same nationality as the item... I understand that it's not a very good thing now but I still can't understand how can a museum be unsure about it's national arms... it'd be almost ok to make an error with foreign armour, but with their own... :(

I agree, and I mentioned that before, that they make sense as greaves - but I mentioned as well that a short one (like the one I posted before) was quite comfortable for me for fighting. It was, of course, a quite modern one (as I made it :) ) so most likely it resembles the originals only a bit. IF I had the chance to at least SEE originals personally from more angles and in full size then it's quite likely that I'd be convinced.

But as I don't have the chance, and it worked for me as a vambrace, I can only say that they can be either. Now, if you really want to convince me, send me a few originals so I can try them on! Unfortunatuly I won't be able to send them back... :D

(((I always like to learn new things... I have never thought of them as greaves before, and now, I'll be the first in Hungary who will use them. Thanks. :) )))

[Aqtai]

Sorry, I mostly believe the museum which has the same nationality as the item... I understand that it's not a very good thing now but I still can't understand how can a museum be unsure about it's national arms... it'd be almost ok to make an error with foreign armour, but with their own... :(

I agree, and I mentioned that before, that they make sense as greaves - but I mentioned as well that a short one (like the one I posted before) was quite comfortable for me for fighting. It was, of course, a quite modern one (as I made it :) ) so most likely it resembles the originals only a bit. IF I had the chance to at least SEE originals personally from more angles and in full size then it's quite likely that I'd be convinced.

But as I don't have the chance, and it worked for me as a vambrace, I can only say that they can be either. Now, if you really want to convince me, send me a few originals so I can try them on! Unfortunatuly I won't be able to send them back... :D

(((I always like to learn new things... I have never thought of them as greaves before, and now, I'll be the first in Hungary who will use them. Thanks. :) )))

Most of these things are 350+ years old, people tend to forget how they they were used. Further more they've only been valuable antiques for the last 125 years or so, prior to that they were just seen as worthless pieces of obsolete military equipment, another reason to forget how to use them.

By the way this picture is from the Museo Stibbert in Florence, I think it's actually quite old, I have a feeling that things have been re-arranged there. Take a look at what the equestrian figure has on his legs. :)

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/5716/ottomanbardmuseostibbert1017ui.jpg

[Ahriman]

I don't think that they'd remember using it - but I'd think that they have more written source on it.
And, you know, most of the hungarian kids I know can't even find the difference between a german and an italian harness, but they recognise a hussar breastplate at the first glance, because lots of our 16th century heroes wore those... I'm a bit tired to express myself good enough, but I think you can understand what I mean. Every nation has it's heroic stories, myths, etc, and there's always at least one hero whose arms and armour is mentioned.

[Ahriman]

Oh, and nice suits on that photo. I see what you mean... but here it looks strange to me, I don't know why. Size's good, and everything, and still... it may be simply the light, but it seems to me that the bigger curve is on the front. :confused:
Now, all this means that I have the same lower arm proportions as a 16th century turkis warriors CALF??? Because the main idea in thinking that my posted pic is a vambrace is that it'd fit my arm perfectly..?
BTW, did you explore the full rubens server? It has tons of pics on armour, unfortunatuly, most are europeans.

[Aqtai]

I had a look at the Ruben's server, there is a vast amount of stuff there, I'm quite impressed.

BTW on one of my google searches for pictures of oriental armour. I found this website. It has loads of photos of Russian krugs.
http://jeffmartin.com/Default.aspx?tabid=32&photocat=368%7c54%7c4%7c0%7c0%7c0%7c0%7c5%7c1%7c

[Ahriman]

Thank you, very nice pictures! Btw, that mailcoat... :eek: HUGE links... Is it original? It's quite hard to beleive... :eek:
What did you search for? I've tried it in countless ways, but I just couldn't find these... :(

[Aqtai]

Thank you, very nice pictures! Btw, that mailcoat... :eek: HUGE links... Is it original? It's quite hard to beleive... :eek:
What did you search for? I've tried it in countless ways, but I just couldn't find these... :(

They are massive aren't they. :D I guess I'll just have to add the Kremlin Armoury to my "List of Museums I must vist one day", it can join the Topkapi Museum, Askeri Muze, Hermitage Museum and Museo Stibbert.

I simply use the "images" option on Google and type in a variety of search terms, usually things like "Turkish armour", "Turkish armor", "Iranian helmets" etc.

Here's an example:
http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=turkish+armour&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images

[ham]

Gentlemen,

Coats of the type you are referring to, with very large, flat rings are called BAYDANA in Russian. They were actually worn over another coat of smaller rings. The Mamluks also wore coats of large, flat rings but as a primary, rather than secondary, defense. These generally fell out of use in the Near East in the 15th century, but persisted in Russia until the 17th.

Sincerely,

Ham

[Aqtai]

Thanks Ham, I know very little about Russian armour, that is one of the first websites i've seen with relatively detailed photos of Russian armour. I wasn't aware that the mamluks used mail shirts with very large rings, all the Mamluk mail shirts i have seen have normal size rings.

I also found the Russian krugs interesting in that with many of them the plates are not connected by mail like Turco-Iranian krugs, but are attached to some kind of leather liner. It's almost like they are an intermediate stage between mail-and-plate krugs and chahar aina cuirasses.

[Ahriman]

Norm of Silk Roads said that the main distinction between turkish and russian krug is that the latter is made with leather straps. So I wasn't suprised on that. :)
So these were worn on finer mail? Ok, then... I've heard about this, but I've never thought that "large" means THIS large. Only a bet: the mamluks confronted mostly sabres is CQ, did they? Do you have any info about the ring sizes?
Btw, Ham: from where do you have so much information on these subjects? Are there any kind of book on these? Even now, I have a veeeery long wish list on books, but there's never enough. :)
Oh, and thanks for the input! :)

[Aqtai]

The mamluks confronted a wide variety of enemies. In the 13th century they fought European Crusaders, Mongol hordes and each other. The 14th century was a relatively peaceful period, their main enemies were each other. In the 15th century they fought Timur-i-Lenk, European Crusaders on Cyprus, the Kara-Koyonlu and Ak-Koyunlu (although these were minor skirmishes), in the years 1500-1517 the mamluks fought the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean, with mixed results (they hated naval warfare) and finally the Ottoman Turks with disastrous results.

[Battara]

Ahriman, have been watching this and wanted to answer some earlier questions regarding the Moro armor. Here is a link from Oriental-arms to a Moro armor piece with a closeup on the latches. One end of the latch would go into one of the holes in of the rods on the left and the other would be free to go into the one on the right. Behind the plate is brass that would help hold the piece in place to place the latches in place.

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=1466

[ham]

Ahriman,

I have been researching and teaching in the field for many years (I once heard a student say, since the Franco-Prussian War.) Where arms and armour are concerned, one is well-advised not to take anything at face value, but to make informed conclusions-- published information, i.e. books, archival data, inscriptions are all excellent but must be taken in conjunction with physical examination and when possible, application. This is the only way to learn to distinguish between fanstasy and reality, lore and research, particularly with the rise of the internet, which allots credence to even the least informed and most outlandish opinions (to say nothing of overarching egotism) by virtue of their appearance in print.
A museum's geographical location is not a guarantee of accuracy, on any count whatsoever. Nationalism, nepotism and a good many other -isms can and do affect how the public is informed by such institutions.
You might acquire a copy of Robinson's Oriental Armour, it lays out a good typology and plots the evolution of various types throughout Asia. The language is accessible and not given to pointless esoteric references, and the plates and illustrations are informative.

Sincerely,

Ham

[Aqtai]

Ahriman,

...A museum's geographical location is not a guarantee of accuracy, on any count whatsoever. Nationalism, nepotism and a good many other -isms can and do affect how the public is informed by such institutions...

You can say that again! I've been to various museums in Egypt, and they have the most outrageous inaccuracies. The worst for this is the Military Museum in the Citadel of Cairo, which definitely has its own ideological axe to grind. The descriptions on the items there are ridiculously inaccurate, I got the feeling that the guy making the labels was just making it up as he went along! You get things like a mannequin wearing an Ottoman mail shirt and an 18th century Iranian kulah khud style helmet described as "Ayyubid fighter 12th century". :eek:

Here are some example from the Rubens server (an excellent resource BTW) this first is a picture from the Coptic Museum in Cairo of an Iranian Separ shield and kulah khud helmet described as 11th-13th century (without specifying if this is a AD date or Higri date), also check out the description of the Roman helmet:
http://rubens.anu.edu.au/egypt/cairo/museums/coptic_museum/arms_and_armour/
http://rubens.anu.edu.au/egypt/cairo/museums/coptic_museum/arms_and_armour/index1.html

[fengmodao]

Hello , I am a new member who comes from China !
1=The China Tibet suit of armour.
3=Light , it was effective with the fire prevention ware to make warm to the compound suit of armour in 18 centuries on the China Qing Dynasty suit of armour
4=Korea suit of armour and China are identical . The fish scale suit of armour . We think that the fish scale is the method that the efficiency is very high . Bear a lot of shocks power .

[fengmodao]

:) :) :) Is the suit of armour to paste the host of image that infantry use or cavalryman use ? The bigger and firm suit of armour still could be covered in the outward appearance of identical in China suit of armour ! We are accustomed to the protection of effective multilayer ! :) :) :)

[Aqtai]

Lamellar armour (the type shown in the 2 top photos) would certainly be a lot easier to make than mail and plate armour, and it was widely used. Not only was it used in China and Tibet, but also in Iran and the Middle-East up until the 14th century AD. In the Middle East it seems to have been superseded by mail-and-plate armours in the early 15th century. AFAIK there are no complete surving Islamic lamellar armours, although fragments and individual lamellae have been found in Iraq.

[Rivkin]

According to Gorelik (btw I really liked his last two books), lamellar armor was produced by mongols because it's offered far better protection against arrows than mail.

[Ahriman]

Indeed, faaaar better... One of my friends made one out of 1mm spring steel, and was quite suprised when most arrows bounced off without denting the metal... the rest left small dents, but none have pierced. The bow was, if I'm right, 60#.
I don't really like chinese harnesses, as I'm rather a m&p-maniac idiot :D , but the last looks good... even to me. :)

Ham: I think your students are VERY lucky... most hungarian teachers, even quite many of the university teachers, are still thinking that a full-plate harness is too heavy to move in it, that the knights were put on the horses by cranes, etc... :mad:

Aqtai: nice examples, I'm convinced... :mad: But I was still able to use something like these greaves for fighting... and it was good... Hm, maybe I invented something new??? :D

BTW, I've added full fingers and a knuckle plate to the "vambrace", or "elbow-demigauntlet" on the first page. Looks less eastern than ever... more like a "muslimised" german elbow gauntlet. I'll post pictures of it in a few days. Reason of upgrade: idiotic owner became overconfident as it provided good defense, especially compared to a thin leather gauntlet used for semi-full contact. He didn't really bother to defend a back-edge cut to the wrist, as he had mail there... but that cut missed with about 5cm, and opened one of his non-gloved fingers down to the bone, AND splitted his fingernail. :eek: I won't post photos of THIS. :D

[Ahriman]

Hm, isn't it a little familiar, Aqtai? (http://sepsik.freeweb.hu/bemutato/keso-romai-sisak/eredeti.html) :D This is the guy who tested the lamellar.

[Aqtai]

Indeed, faaaar better... One of my friends made one out of 1mm spring steel, and was quite suprised when most arrows bounced off without denting the metal... the rest left small dents, but none have pierced. The bow was, if I'm right, 60#.
I don't really like chinese harnesses, as I'm rather a m&p-maniac idiot :D , but the last looks good... even to me.

Ham: I think your students are VERY lucky... most hungarian teachers, even quite many of the university teachers, are still thinking that a full-plate harness is too heavy to move in it, that the knights were put on the horses by cranes, etc... :mad:

Aqtai: nice examples, I'm convinced... :mad: But I was still able to use something like these greaves for fighting... and it was good... Hm, maybe I invented something new??? :D

BTW, I've added full fingers and a knuckle plate to the "vambrace", or "elbow-demigauntlet" on the first page. Looks less eastern than ever... more like a "muslimised" german elbow gauntlet. I'll post pictures of it in a few days. Reason of upgrade: idiotic owner became overconfident as it provided good defense, especially compared to a thin leather gauntlet used for semi-full contact. He didn't really bother to defend a back-edge cut to the wrist, as he had mail there... but that cut missed with about 5cm, and opened one of his non-gloved fingers down to the bone, AND splitted his fingernail. :eek: I won't post photos of THIS. :D


I'm looking forward to seeing your work. :)

I hope your client recovers from his wounds. What the hell was he doing anyway?!

About the lamellar armour, because it was made of rigid plates, it did indeed provide an excellent defence against arrows compared to mail, however it had quite a few weaknesses: it wasn't particularly good against swords and sabres because the lacing could be cut, furthermore because it was quite rigid, vulnerable areas like the armpits and groin were left exposed. Mail and plate armour provided a compromise: rigid plates over the abdomen and back, mail over the groin and limbs.

Another problem with lamellar of course was that the lacing would get soaked in wet weather increasing the weight, and the lacing sometimes got infested with lice etc.

This picture is a Tibetan lamellar armour from the Rubens server, the actual armour is in the Royal Armouries (Although it wasn't there when I last visited the the RA).
http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid1cdroms/england/leeds/museums/royal_armories/arms_and_armour/mongol/P1015070.JPG

Here's another 15th century mail and plate armour from the Royal Armouries:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Mamluk_mail-and-plate_armour.jpg

According to the label it's Turkish, According to Robinson's "Oriental Armour" though it's Mamluk. It does ressemble the mamluk mail and plate shirts in the Topqapi.

[Ahriman]

He was fighting... :D Semi-full contact. :D Overconfident. :D Not a very unusual thing here. A guy ordered greaves with knees because one of his friends lost his... patella, maybe? That piece of bone over the knee, I don't know it's english name. The surgery tool was the "spike" of a two-handed, rebated viking axe. Stupid people, we are... but as we have a few good armourers, more and more of these idiots realize that plate on vulnerable joints = life-long joint usage...

I bet you like Rubens, don't you? :)
That RA suit is nice, but it has HUGE links... And it seems rivetted. :confused:
Wait, I recall Ham telling us that mamluks used baydana as a primary defense... which means HUGE links... Ok, it's mamluk. :D
Did they ever fight europeans? Especially germans? Because this link size is EXTREMELY vulnerable to half-swording IMO.

Thanks for listing the reasons of my anti-lamellar mindset... ;)
BTW, Norm wrote that there were samurai armours with long plates, opened only on one side, so the owner was helped into it by assistants who pulled it apart. Is it true? It seems quite a stupid thing to me, as the continuous opening-closing would stress the metal... which's not good. :confused:

[Aqtai]

The mamluks were a fascinating bunch. They were a caste of warrior-slaves, originally Turkish but later Circassian from the Caucasus, who ruled over Egypt, Syria, Arabia and parts of Asia minor from 1250 AD to 1517 AD. Their capital city was Cairo which they filled with beautiful Mosques, Khanqa's, madrassahs, hospitals and Wikalas (caravanserais). Even after the Ottoman conquest they remained the dominant military group in Egypt until 1807.

As I said before , they fought a wide variety of enemies. They fought the Crusaders in the 13th century and inflicted several defeats on them, eventually driving them out of the Middle-East. They managed to stop Mongol expansion into North Africa by defeating the Mongols in 3 major battles in 1260, 1281 and finally 1303, although a few mamluks were themselves of Mongol origin, including one Mamluk sultan.

They may have come up against German Crusaders, although to my knowledge they never fought an all-German army. In the 15th century the mamluks conquered Cyprus, the last surviving Crusader kingdom, I presume that the Crusaders of Cypus may have used Western European weapons and equipment. In the early 1500s the mamluks fought a naval war against the Portuguese in the Indian ocean. Since the mamluks were primarily heavy cavalry/horse archers I'm not sure how much of a role they took in a naval battle. I have a suspicion that much of the fighting in the Indian Ocean was done by Maghribi (North African) mercenaries.

Finally the mamluks fought Napoleon Bonaparte duing his invision of Egypt in 1798. they used virtually the same tactics they used against the Crusaders, the Mongols and the Ottomans. Needless to say Napoleon defeated them, although he then went on the create his own small unit of mamluks!

The mamluks certainly used lamellar armour as well as mail in the 13th and 14th centuries, in the 15th century however they abandonned lamellar armour in favour of mail and plate armour. They also continued to use mail right until 1798.

[Ahriman]

Thanks for the info! I think they (the mamluks) were rather lucky - in the 13th century they didn't have to face vollharnischers, as then even the italians used only a few knees, and elbows... I mean, plate defense for them. :D
I have asked earlier, but it seems that no-one replied... did eastern people ever develop halfswording? Especially when confronting m&p armour, or strong riveted, it'd be crucial... but I haven't heard of it. But, again, I haven't heard about this vambrace-greave debate before... :D

[Aqtai]

Thanks for the info! I think they (the mamluks) were rather lucky - in the 13th century they didn't have to face vollharnischers, as then even the italians used only a few knees, and elbows... I mean, plate defense for them. :D
I have asked earlier, but it seems that no-one replied... did eastern people ever develop halfswording? Especially when confronting m&p armour, or strong riveted, it'd be crucial... but I haven't heard of it. But, again, I haven't heard about this vambrace-greave debate before... :D

If mamluks took part in the fighting in the 1500s, they may have come up against Portuguese officers wearing full plate armour, but I doubt it as naval warfare is different, how many guys in full plate armour will be on the deck of a Nao reppelling boarders? The Mamluk navy did defeat the Portuguese in one naval battle in 1508, but as I said before, I think most of the fighting was done by Maghribi mercenaries, not mamluks.

I'm sorry to seem ignorant, but what is "half-swording"?

[Ahriman]

It's a gripping method that gives extraordinary control and force to thursts and slices by sacrificing real cuts. When halfswording, you grab the BLADE with one (mostly the left) hand, while the other grabs the hilt as usual. By this, you get a short and very light spear AND a good grabbing tool as well.

I'll describe a very simple scenario. You are holding your sword in halfswording, left on the blade, thumbs pointing at each other. Your opponent cuts from above in an angle, targeting your left collar-bone. You raise your left hand much more than your right and receive the blow between your hands in a quite sharp angle. His blade slides down and stops at the quillon. Then you lower your left and raise your right hand as if you were to sheath your sword to your left. By this, your opponent's blade is incapable to cut you, the point is far behind you, and he could only move it to your far left. Then you simply strike him in the face with the pommel. Even as it took quite long to tell, it's carried out lightning fast, and most likely wounds the opponent quite well, even if he was wearing armour.

Mostly halfswording is done in armour, where you have a good leather glove to protect your blade-grabbing palm, but there are pictures showing unarmoured use, mostly with either slender blades or some kind of cloth on the blade... and sometimes without any of these. Of course, it makes it clear that you NEVER block a blow fully, or in 90°, nor do you block with the edge. Imagine the effect of a two-handed full-power blade driving your sword into your... lower arm... :eek: Or the bending effect of the same, if you received the blow to the flat in 90°.

BTW, my question came from that I saw half-swording advised for messers. (messers are huge knife-like swords, sometimes twohanded, mostly resembling wide-bladed, crossguarded katanas) So it'd logical that eastern fighters developed it as well - cuts for unarmoured opponents and strong thursts for the mail-armoured, or m&p wearing ones...?

Sorry for the long post, but I think that the more you know... well, then the more you know. :) Which is a good thing. :D

In the 1500's, and especially in naval warfare, one would only wear a strong breastplate, or even less... say, a gorget. So that's doesn't count... :)

[Aqtai]

In that case, AFAIK the mamluks never developped half-swording.

The mamluks fought as horse-archers/heavy cavalry. they would soften up their enemies from a distance using composite bows on horseback bows mongol-style, then once the enemy was sufficiently weakened they would charge with their lances. for close quarters work they would use maces and warhammers. In the 13th century the main sword used by mamluks was a straight double-edged sword. During the course of the 14th century they gradually adopted kilij-style sabres.

Their main enemies in the 14th-15th centuries, apart from each other, were the Mongols, The Aq-Qoyonlu Turcomans and the Ottomans, all of who would have been similarly equiped and (initially at least with regards to the Ottomans, they adopted field artillary and muskets in the late 15th century) would have used similar tactics.

Mamluk words:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Weapons/Yucel_37_ISAS.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Weapons/ISAS_pl.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Weapons/65_ISAS_pl.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Weapons/ISAS_56_and_57_1.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Weapons/ISAS_55_Mamluk_Sword_mid-15th_C_1.jpg

As you can see, non are particularly suited to half-swording. All are meant for use on horseback.

[Aqtai]

Ahriman, I've just found another mail and plate vambrace for you. This one is from Robert Elgood's "Hindu Arms and Ritual".
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/SouthIndianbazuband1.jpg

[Ahriman]

Thanks, both vambraces are very nice... and the upper one has that more solid metacarpal plate I missed. Is that mail riveted? It seems very thin...

Thanks for the swords as well... They are indeed better for horseback usage, especially as they mostly lack a real thrusting point... They were VERY lucky with avoiding open combat against vollharnischers... :) A good harness is quite hard to defeat with cuts, even with a good wide twohander, and most, especially milanese, harnesses were able to repel arrows, even from average crossbows in the 500-550 pounds area.

[Aqtai]

Thanks, both vambraces are very nice... and the upper one has that more solid metacarpal plate I missed. Is that mail riveted? It seems very thin...

I'm afraid the book doesn't tell me if the links are rivetted or not. But from what I've read almost all Indian mail made before 1750 AD used rivetted links.

Thanks for the swords as well... They are indeed better for horseback usage, especially as they mostly lack a real thrusting point... They were VERY lucky with avoiding open combat against vollharnischers... :) A good harness is quite hard to defeat with cuts, even with a good wide twohander, and most, especially milanese, harnesses were able to repel arrows, even from average crossbows in the 500-550 pounds area.

I'm not so sure about that. Ottoman cavalry used almost identical equipment to the mamluks, indeed some actually was Mamluk equipment captured after the Ottoman conquest of Egypt in 1517. Unlike the mamluks, the Ottomans fought many battles against western Europeans in the 15th and 16th centuries, many of which the Ottomans won, like the battle of Mohacs in 1526. :)

Islamic cavalry had a different style of fighting, they would stay away from the enemy shooting arrows from horseback, they would only engage in hand-to-hand combat after the enemy was weakened and exhausted.

BTW I found this picture of the back of an Ottoman krug at oriental-arms.com.

http://oriental-arms.co.il/photos/items/77/001577/ph-0.jpg

The shoulder piece would be connected to the back-plates with mail links or leather straps, then the whole assembly would be attached to the front of the armor with leather straps and buckles and worn over a mail shirt.

I don't think these shoulder plates and back plates are a matching set though, the shoulder plates look much bigger.

[Ahriman]

Damnit, I've found halfswording in a moghul painting... :eek: :eek: :eek: In the topic of crossbows.

BTW, 1500 is quite at the end of the age of plate. Then a well-equipped mercenary (landsknecht) had only minimal protection compared to earlier soldiers. You know, equipping 5000 soldiers from the same money as 2500 halves the money/soldier... Because of this, a well-equipped merc had a skull-cap, a gorget (face left open), breastplate (often without back), tassels, and usually legs, sometimes demigauntlets. And sometimes, they had splinted arms, or even full gauntlets. And remember, these were the best soldiers of the time. They could use their armour to stop attacks quite well, but they had vital areas exposed.
And when these fell, their leaders in full-plate had to run. You know, no matter how good is you armour, when you are surrounded by axe- dagger- sword- mace- hammerwielding enemies, you have no other chance.
And by 1526, muslim artillery was superior compared to ours. But remember, most of our nobles drowned while running... which means that the vollharnischers were not defeated in "open combat", "just" overnumbered by 1-999999999. :)
Afterall, it was truly a huge defeat, caused by our leaders' arrogance and ignorance... it was a much bigger factor than equiptment.

Fighting style: I know... but that would've hurt "only" the poorer soldiers. Which were the 90% of the army. :D I think that we should've stayed at our old nomad tactics... by converting to christianity, we had to use knights and so... we forgot good eastern tactics, and we failed to perfectly adapt western ways as well. :mad:

Krug: thanks, nice picture, and I think you're right - it's like assembling the 2m+ italian harness with a regular one. :)

I will post the gauntlet pictures soon, but I'm quite busy, and my camera is wrecked.

[Aqtai]

I also saw that picture in the crossbow topic. I guess I've just learned something new. I know nothing though about how Oriental and Islamic swords were used. I know India has got a rather elaborate martial arts system of its own called Gatka, it could be this a gatka manoevre. However I know absolutely nothing about Gatka either, other than the fact that modern practitioners all appear to be Sikh, so it may be a purely Sikh martial art. :D

I'm looking forward to seeing your finished armour. :)

[Ahriman]

Oi!
I was away for a while, buried under work... :(
I couldn't take a picture of the remade vambrace I mentioned... my camera was dead then, and my sister bought one for herself only a few days ago... but the buyer will most likely send me the pictures, if he doesn't forget it. :) It turned out very nice, and I blackened the whole thing - looks good.

Yesterday, I finished another eastern vambrace, I'd like to hear your opinions. The plate is 1.5mm CR steel, the rings are 8mm diameter and are 1.5mm thick. Every plate except the border ones are fluted, flutes being 5mm high, except on the longest plate, where they are 10mm, and on the central metacarpal plate, where there's only a touch of fluting, about 1mm. There's a strap under the knuckles, and straps and buckles at wrist and at 2 point of the vambrace. The mail on the wrist is laced with a leather bit. Soon, I'll get pictures of the buyer wearing it.
Lower part of the vambrace is extremely wide, as the buyer uses golves almost equivalent to hockey gloves, and would stand up by themselfes against blunt sabers. :D
The pictures are rather low quality, as this camera costed 15$... :-///
And I took the photos in dark... but they are, I think, usable.
Closeup on the flutes, before blacking.
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18036135.jpg
One laid out, one compacted... :-)
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18036138.jpg
And a full picture.
http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18036136.jpg

BTW, did they ever make helmets like the spangenhelm, but joined with mail? I think I've seen something like this somewhere, but I'm not sure. And if it did exist, would it be OK for that vambrace and a krug?

[Aqtai]

Hi Ahriman, welcome back! :)

Nice work on that vambrace.

Helmets of the type you described were used in India from the 16th-19th century (and probably a lot earlier).

Here's one from the Royal Armouries in Leeds:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Mailandplatehelmet_RA_015.jpg

Another one from the Royal armouries:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/SindiHelmet093.jpg

This one is from "Hindu Arms and Ritual" by Robert Elgood:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental%20Warriors/Mail-and-platehelmIndia16th-17thC3.jpg

You seem to be going for a very Indian look at the moment. :)

Other helmets of the same type from the Royal Armouries:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/mughul_mail-and-plate_17th_c.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Mughul_armour_and_bard_17th_c.jpg

Oh yes, I recently found this picture of a 15th century Mamluk Krug, look familiar? :D
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/MamlukKrug1.jpg

[Ahriman]

Wow, thanks, very useful pictures... :D Again, something I thought I invented... :D :D :D

Is it possible that either the krug got there, or these helmets got to the turks? The buyer with the new vambraces would like them combined, and I'm curious that how correct would this be.

Yes, I simply love indian stuff, btw... Maybe with small alterations here and there... :D

[Aqtai]

I think there are few doubts about the Krug. Not only did the Ottomans make extensive use of krugs themselves, but after the Ottomans conquered the Mamluk Sultanate in 1517, they carted huge amounts of Mamluk armour and weapons back to Istanbul. It was subsequently reused by Ottoman troops. With regards to using Indian-style mail and plate helmets we are on much shakier ground. There is no doubt that Mughul armour was influenced by Ottoman and Persian armour, but the influence seems to have flown in only one direction. I haven't seen any Ottoman helmets with a similar method of construction. :)

By the way, I've found pics of another Indian helmet of a similar type:
http://www.ashokaarts.com/armour/ar-5.html

[Ahriman]

Ehm, I was thinking about such a design less than a week ago... Is there nothing new I could invent? :D

Would it be correct to put arabic text onto the disc of the krug instead of radial flutes? My costumer would like the word "Allah" onto it, but I can't recall any examples... problem is that that I'm quite against using fantasy style stuff for serious reenacting, so I ask for +50% if the buyer wants something that's out of style, or if it can't be explained by combining existing and contacting styles.

[Aqtai]

Ehm, I was thinking about such a design less than a week ago... Is there nothing new I could invent? :D

Would it be correct to put arabic text onto the disc of the krug instead of radial flutes? My costumer would like the word "Allah" onto it, but I can't recall any examples... problem is that that I'm quite against using fantasy style stuff for serious reenacting, so I ask for +50% if the buyer wants something that's out of style, or if it can't be explained by combining existing and contacting styles.

I see no reason why inscriptions cannot be put on the Disc, I have seen many examples, like this 16th century Mamluk or Ottoman krug in The Khalili Collection book:

http://img469.imageshack.us/img469/5756/pectoraldiscottoman16thcentury.jpg

Why just stop at "Allah". Many real Islamic armours and weapons had a variety of inscriptions, including verses from the Qur'an, the names and titles of the Sultan that the warrior wearing the armour was serving, and in the case of armour made for high ranking amirs, the names and titles of the owner. :)

[Ahriman]

Ok, thanks, nice picture again...

I'll stop at Allah because of the price... I got $50 for the vambraces, and I'll get $225 for the krug which will be blacked as well... :(
Another reason is that I've started learning arabic only very recently... :D I could copy, of course, but I want to understand exactly what I write.
Oh, and I'll get $50 for the indian-like helmet as well... :-/

[Aqtai]

Ok, thanks, nice picture again...

I'll stop at Allah because of the price... I got $50 for the vambraces, and I'll get $225 for the krug which will be blacked as well... :(
Another reason is that I've started learning arabic only very recently... :D I could copy, of course, but I want to understand exactly what I write.
Oh, and I'll get $50 for the indian-like helmet as well... :-/

Fair comment. :D
I have to say your prices sound pretty reasonable.

hmm...

[Ahriman]

They are not reasonable - they are killing my shop... :( I have to buy food, and pay for heat, water and electricity, while I have to constantly stock raw material and buy new equipment. I sell most of my armour far under value, either because I was late with them, or I desperately need that money, or simply because I'm not famous, and mostly, because I'm in Hungary, and sell only to Hungary. Even a good SCA level armour sells at $2-3000, but I could get less than $800 for the very same, while MacPherson, the very best modern armourer can ask for 20K as a start.
And because of this, I have to stick to munitions grade stuff... where function is more important than anything else, and production cost can be kept at a minimum. If someone wanted to pay even 10-15K for a vollharnisch, and would be able to wait for a year or so, I could even make Negroli-level armour, as I have the tools and the skill as well... but for 800$, I won't. :D

So if anyone is interested: the correct price for that fluted vambrace should be at $100-120, the helmet about 150, and the krug is correct at 225. A correct, munitions grade barbute (italian classic-like helmet) would be about $400. Riveted mail doubles the price, while blackening adds 50%. :(

[Ahriman]

Hm, I forgot.
Is it possible to put skirting on a krug? You know, something like the suit in the MET...
And one more thing... How high shall a krug be? The current one is modified already, so it doesn't count, but the next one will be, most likely, authentic... I made it to european standars, so it stops a little after the ribs. Is it too long, or too short?
Last thing. I bet you don't put on a hauberk under a krug, right?
Thanks!

[Aqtai]

Hm, I forgot.
Is it possible to put skirting on a krug? You know, something like the suit in the MET...
And one more thing... How high shall a krug be? The current one is modified already, so it doesn't count, but the next one will be, most likely, authentic... I made it to european standars, so it stops a little after the ribs. Is it too long, or too short?
Last thing. I bet you don't put on a hauberk under a krug, right?
Thanks!

Actually, AFAIK, you do! :D

The krug was worn over a mail hauberk. It provided additional protection to the chest, abdomen, sides and shoulders. Although i suppose they could also be worn on their own. :)

This is an old photo of the Royal armouries krug. And yes those are greaves being used as vambraces, like I said, it's an old photo:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Miscellaneous/Ottoman_Korazin.jpg

It was still over a mail hauberk when I first visited the Royal armouries in 1989.

This is how it is now:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Royal%20Armouries/Turkish_korazin-16th_C.jpg

These krugs are also worn over mail hauberks:
http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/5716/ottomanbardmuseostibbert1017ui.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental%20Warriors/Krug_Ottoman_Stone_1.jpg

I normally don't really approve of reconstructions (they get too many details wrong), but I think this might be helpful:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Medieval%20European%20Armour/Ottomanscirca1600.jpg

[Ahriman]

Ok, thanks, useful pictures again... :)
So I measured it well... sad thing is that I can't find examples of skirted krugs... So my one will be semi-fantasy, it seems... Krug-inspired mail&plates harness, huh. :) But if that's the case, I will add the integrated m&p sleeves and the standing collar... it won't make it less authentic. :D
BTW, would this pass as Allah? (http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18173948.jpg)
Oh, and it's the current layout, now without the spaulders. (http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18173947.jpg) The back disc will have more flutes... exactly 16. The armpit-plates will have reinforcing flutes, at the centerline of the triangles. The main modification was the reducing of the disc's size. The lowest plate, which is now in one place, will be in 3, reducing the krug-like look even more. :)
Opinions? Especially, would it be possible?

[Aqtai]

Ok, thanks, useful pictures again... :)
So I measured it well... sad thing is that I can't find examples of skirted krugs... So my one will be semi-fantasy, it seems... Krug-inspired mail&plates harness, huh. :) But if that's the case, I will add the integrated m&p sleeves and the standing collar... it won't make it less authentic. :D
BTW, would this pass as Allah? (http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18173948.jpg)
Oh, and it's the current layout, now without the spaulders. (http://img.tar.hu/ahriman/img/18173947.jpg) The back disc will have more flutes... exactly 16. The armpit-plates will have reinforcing flutes, at the centerline of the triangles. The main modification was the reducing of the disc's size. The lowest plate, which is now in one place, will be in 3, reducing the krug-like look even more. :)
Opinions? Especially, would it be possible?

I'll put it this way: you're not going to whin any prizes for Arabic calligraphy. :D but yes, it's legible. :)

I see what you mean about the "skirt". It does change the appearence considerably. The bit above that is fine though. You haven't done the side pieces yet though?

Here's another picture of just the front part of a krug:
http://www.antiques-arms.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=63&products_id=548

[Ahriman]

Well, keep in mind that I'm learning arabic only... well, about a month ago, and I have less than a hour daily for it. :D
No, I didn't work on it more since then... I'm going to start hammering in about 10 minutes, so I'll tire you with even more pictures... :D

[Ahriman]

BTW, could you please post/send me a few (million :) ) pictures of arabic calligraphy on armour? Or on anything? I'll have to learn it, but I don't think it'd be a good idea if I started improvising... :D

[Aqtai]

BTW, could you please post/send me a few (million :) ) pictures of arabic calligraphy on armour? Or on anything? I'll have to learn it, but I don't think it'd be a good idea if I started improvising... :D

:D

I'll try, but it will mean lots of scanning. :)

[Ahriman]

Hm, 25% off any item you might buy from our shop? :D

Side pieces are done, by now the only missing piece is the spaulder, buyer comes for test fit tomorrow, so it'll be ready in less than a week with blackening... then, I'll have to make that musculata from King Arthur, and after that, I'll have time to (at least) start my own eastren harness. :)

[Aqtai]

Hm, 25% off any item you might buy from our shop? :D

Side pieces are done, by now the only missing piece is the spaulder, buyer comes for test fit tomorrow, so it'll be ready in less than a week with blackening... then, I'll have to make that musculata from King Arthur, and after that, I'll have time to (at least) start my own eastren harness. :)

Right, where do i start?

Well first of all there are many types of Arabic scripts (or fonts if you prefer), but the most common types you see on armour and weapons are
kufi, thuluth, and nastaliq.

Thuluth tended to used on most Mamluk and Ottoman armour in the 15th and 16th century, Nastaliq was used on Persian and Indian armour from the 16th to the 19th century. Kufic script was used on really old Fatimid and Ayyubid artifacts (and presumably arms and armour, although virtually non survives) as well as 15th century Iranian weapons and armour.

The other thing is that not all inscriptions on Islamic armour are Koranic verses or names and titles. Sometimes they are apparently meaningless jumbles of letters which actually have talismanic or "magical" meanings.

Here's an example of Thuluth script on a Mamluk sword:
(click on the thumbnail)
http://img452.imageshack.us/img452/7038/swordhiltb5ll.th.jpg (http://img452.imageshack.us/my.php?image=swordhiltb5ll.jpg)

http://img452.imageshack.us/img452/7804/swordpointb1ya.th.jpg (http://img452.imageshack.us/my.php?image=swordpointb1ya.jpg)

Here's Thuluth script on a 15th century Iranian "Turban helmet"
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Turban_Helmet_Metropolitan_1.jpg

Kufic script on a 15th century Iranian Greave:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Oriental/Greave_Iranian_1.jpg

I can't find any examples of Nastaliq script at the moment, I'll need to have a look around. :)

[Ahriman]

Thanks, PM sent... :)
BTW, that "jumble of letters" means that I can write whatever I want as far as it looks good and say that it's "magical" enhancement? :rolleyes:

[Aqtai]

Hi Ahriman, how is your Krug getting along?

Anyway, I recently bought "Armes et Armures Russes" (Editions d'Art Aurore, Leningrad, 1982) which has a number of pictures of Russian armour and weapons.

This was one of the photos. I'm hoping it will bring some sort of closure to the greave/vambrace debate:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y110/Nephtys/Medieval%20European%20Armour/Eastern%20Europe/GreavesRus17thc.jpg

I think that the item in this photo does look more like a greave than a vambrace. :)

[Dom]

Hi
your request was; "to post as much pictures/drawings of armour from outside europe, especially from the middle-east"
this answer doesn't came very fast, but at least not the last may be :o
a part of my little treasures

à +

Dom

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8746&stc=1

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8747&stc=1

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8748&stc=1

[Titus Pullo]

Nice pictures of armors and the info, you guys! I woder if these guys ever get fungus rot wearing so much and tight armors? I'm sure that would be a huge problem when you come to Southeast Asia. It's wet and hot all year round! They only have two seasons in the tropics...wet and dry season. During the dry season, it gets pretty hot, and it's still very wet and humid than anything Europeans had ever experienced. And during the wet, or the monsoon, season it rains a lot...until the entire forest, cities, and towns are flooded. And not to mention all the biting insects...difficult to scratch if you're wearing armors! [chuckle] The American GI's, who fought in Vietnam, came back and tell the stories of how hot and wet it is, and that they were suffering from severe fungus infection! [laugh!] :D It was a very difficult to move about because of the amount of water and undergrowth.

And I like to make note on the use of armored elephants, though. Elephants are very difficult animals to control because they are bright and probably are aware of what's going on around them. They can feel stress caused by the environments! In that sense they are very dangerous! They kill more zookeepers than any animals in zoos. Stories of Indian elephants killing their mahouts virulently and grusomely by squshing him in a small basket, or teared off the head, or limbs are not uncommon! The use of elephants as tanks is overly exaggerated. When elephants are angry and in pain they will kill everyone, your troops including, not just the enemies. They are used primarily as psychological weapons because being big animals, they would scare the enemies' troops.