![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 452
|
![]()
Aqtai, so which type is this one closer to? shallow or deep?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Merseyside, UK
Posts: 222
|
![]()
I would say that is a deep bowl, however the depth of the bowl is unreliable anyway as I have recently seen pictures of 19th century Iranian kulah khud's with quite deep bowls. I think in retrospect shallow and deep bowls is more likely to be due to regional differences.
Another thing I have read is with regards to the mail camail. Earlier mail i.e. pre-18th century was invariably rivetted, but after 1700 most camails were made with fine butted mail links. the butted mail offers less protection, but, looks better visually and is easier to make. Apart from that, you'll need someone who knows more about Iranian metalwork. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Merseyside, UK
Posts: 222
|
![]()
Just a little update on the rivetted mail/butted mail thing. This picture is from H. R. Robinson's Oriental Armour:
![]() And this is where I got the misconception about deep and shallow bows from: ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|