Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > can say something about this armor Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2  Next 
Author Message
Luis Armando




Location: Mexico
Joined: 09 May 2010
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 12:26 pm    Post subject: can say something about this armor         Reply with quote

Here in Mexico, historians know by its French name "Broigne" but not much about it, I just know they are rings of up to 20mm in diameter that are sewn to a leather vest and sleeves. any of you can tell me more about this armor. please

"Dying is nothing when for the homeland dies" (Jose Maria Morelos)
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Timo Nieminen




Location: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 08 May 2009
Likes: 1 page
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 1,493

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 1:02 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It's an attempt at reconstruction based on art. The real armour would have been mail (as in conventional chainmail). There's a diversity of artistic depictions, sometimes in the same source. For example, mail is depicted in a couple of different ways on the Bayeaux Tapestry, which led to some interpretations that there were 3 or more (depending on the person doing the interpretation) different types of armour shown. Current scholarship is that there is only one type of armour shown - standard 4-in-1 European mail.

This "ring mail" you show (I believe that "ring mail" is the usual Victorian term for this type of reconstruction, but note that "ring mail" was also used to mean conventional mail as well) is one of these. Note that the alternating directions give the appearance of alternate rows in conventional mail.

I don't know the origin of the French term "Broigne", but it looks related to "byrnie". This is still used to mean "ring mail" (as in rings on leather) or other metal things (usually not overlapped) sewn onto leather or some other backing well into the 20th century. As far as I know, this usage comes from (rather uncritically?) making use of older (19th century) sources.

In summary: this is an incorrect reconstruction, based on incorrect speculation from about 100 or so years ago, based on stylised and simplified art.

"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Luis Armando




Location: Mexico
Joined: 09 May 2010
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 1:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Well my friend thanks for your valuable opinions ... but I have a book by an author highly regarded here in Mexico and Spain and I do not say anything unless the author who has quite specific, the armor is for the twelfth and thirteenth century. i do not think that is an erroneous reconstruction.
It says so (the book is in Spanish, I have translated) if you want this here.
http://www.maderuelo.com/descargas/Indumentar...8_1220.pdf
Brunia (broigne). Throughout the centuries XII and XIII are still using the old
system Bruni (broigne) with non-interlaced rings or rings, but aligned and
tangents to each other, in successive series in rows, sewn onto a surface
support (large piece of canvas or leather) and it is also usual row layout
of rings strung on a ribbon pin tella strong or leather and then
stitched and backed with green paint used purple or red (García Cuadrado
1999). According to the same author there is another different technique, thanks to the availability of a ring
another and sewn together tangentially each thread through wire
which, in turn, drilling support. Some authors seem to view representations
Bruni in certain sculptures and frescoes where the lorica is represented by alternate rows
rings (usually two) which overlap a lot of tapes of the same material
but could be a mere stylistic convention. Both images below could be
Bruni, but the defensive element is very difficult to recognize in glyptic.

"Dying is nothing when for the homeland dies" (Jose Maria Morelos)
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Cincinnati, OH
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Likes: 21 pages
Reading list: 231 books

Spotlight topics: 15
Posts: 9,134

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 1:57 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luis,
Your description is of a construction called banded mail, where rows of rings have a thong or band through them.

There is simply no historical evidence for it. As Timo said, it is a Victorian-era mistake that has persisted.

Check out our Feature article on mail for more on that subject.

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Werner Stiegler





Joined: 27 Feb 2007

Posts: 122

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 2:12 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The french tried to recreate the same images as round metal disks sewn to a backing of clothes rather than rings.
View user's profile Send private message
James Anderson III




Location: Charles Town, WV
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 92

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 3:38 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Luis, I have also seen it called "ring mail" which may help you research. I have not seen any historical evidence of it though. It is similar to some of the Japanese mail that was sewn directly to cloth, but is done with much larger rings.

I have not seen it in any existing European armor.

Sable, a chevron between three lions statant Argent
Knight, Order of the Marshal
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Chuck Russell




Location: WV
Joined: 17 Aug 2004
Reading list: 46 books

Posts: 936

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 3:45 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

i know that picture. that armour is in a time era room in a castle in Germany. its a recreation of what they thought banded mail looked like etc. both of which are way off chain mail hehehe. was a fun room to be in but way off historically i think
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Luis Armando




Location: Mexico
Joined: 09 May 2010
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 4:05 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

thank you very much for your comments, any input that you give me is great, really intrigues me, I want a chaussés and chausses I read that in the twelfth century did so
"Dying is nothing when for the homeland dies" (Jose Maria Morelos)
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Timo Nieminen




Location: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 08 May 2009
Likes: 1 page
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 1,493

PostPosted: Tue 01 Feb, 2011 4:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

A nice view of the state of armour research/scholarship a century ago can be read in chapter 1 of ffoulkes "Arms and armour". From 1909, and out-of-copyright, and available online at http://www.archive.org/details/armourweapons00ffouuoft .

Another thing one sees in older books (including some new enough so that the author should have known better) is that mail (i.e. chainmail) was unknown in Europe until brought back by Crusaders returning from the Holy Land. While from a modern perspective, with knowledge of Roman and Dark Ages use of mail, this is just wrong, you can see why all sorts of theories were invented to explain what was seen in art - "it can't be (chain)mail, (chain)mail not being used in Europe yet, so what is the artist showing?"

Once printed in book, misconceptions, myths, and other errors can be persistent. Why, I just read this week, in a modern book by an author who should have known better that the average Chinese pudao/kwandao, as used on the battlefield, weighed 20 pounds.

"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Quinn W.




Location: Bellingham, WA
Joined: 02 May 2009

Posts: 197

PostPosted: Fri 04 Feb, 2011 9:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Werner Stiegler wrote:
The french tried to recreate the same images as round metal disks sewn to a backing of clothes rather than rings.

Do you mean like that thing William Marshall wore in The latest Robin Hood film? If so, it's interesting how inaccuracies are perpetuated.



 Attachment: 66.08 KB
queen-eleanor-and-william-marshall-robin-hood-2010.jpg


"Some say that the age of chivalry is past, that the spirit of romance is dead. The age of chivalry is never past, so long as there is a wrong left unredressed on earth"
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,190

PostPosted: Fri 04 Feb, 2011 1:06 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It is definitely a dodgy reconstruction. I tried to outline the problems with "ring mail" and "banded mail" in this brief essay.
http://www.arador.com/articles/chainmail.html

It is an easy theory to test. All you have to do is show a classroom of kids a mail shirt and ask them to draw it. You'll get every variation that you see in the Bayeux Tapestry and other contemporary illustrations.

"Broigne" is just one of many variants of a general term for "armour". Other variants are brnja, bronja, byrnie, etc. Almost invariably it refers to mail since that was by far the most ccommon armour type.
View user's profile Send private message
Matthew Amt




Location: Laurel, MD, USA
Joined: 17 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,302

PostPosted: Fri 04 Feb, 2011 7:45 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quinn W. wrote:
Do you mean like that thing William Marshall wore in The latest Robin Hood film? If so, it's interesting how inaccuracies are perpetuated.


Hey, nice wimple and veil, though! You almost never see those in the movies.

Y'know, I'm much happier since I gave up on "historical" movies...

Matthew
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,190

PostPosted: Fri 04 Feb, 2011 10:52 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Yeah, Robin Hood annoyed the hell out of me. Not sure why. I loved Braveheart, Kingdom of Heaven, and even 13th Warrior. King Arthur is probably the only "historical" movie that annoyed me more.
View user's profile Send private message
Gottfried P. Doerler




Location: Tyrol, Austria
Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Likes: 4 pages

Posts: 228

PostPosted: Sat 05 Feb, 2011 2:57 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

hm....i just read the mail:unchained article, but i`m still not convinced of the non-existence of the pattern shown above.

first, the words "broigne" or "byrnie" are ethymologicly related to german "brünne" the latter at least rather refering to some sort of scale armour, worn at the age of charlemagne.
and there are some authors of the late 20th cent. arguing for the existence of this type of armour in the 1200`s, being an intermediate form between mail and scale.

second, L. and F. Funcken e.g. in "le Costume, l'armure et les armes au temps de la chevalerie" argue against artistic license, because there are pictorial evidences that show both types in the same picture, disproving the theory, that the artist just wanted to save time by painting "stylised" mail.
and there is a book by F. Buttin "Du costume militaire au moyen age et pendant la renaissance" (1971), which i didn`t read first hand, but it is said, his arguments for broigne are based on studies of literaric contemporary sources, like byzantine Anna Komnena (Alexiad e.g.)

and third, there are only few surviving examples of 12th cent. mail, maybe broignes just did not survive, being held together by leather or cloth. lack of evidence does not mean evidence of lack.
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,190

PostPosted: Sat 05 Feb, 2011 3:57 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gottfried P. Doerler wrote:
first, the words "broigne" or "byrnie" are ethymologicly related to german "brünne" the latter at least rather refering to some sort of scale armour, worn at the age of charlemagne.

No the term just means "armour", not a specific type of armour. Mail and scale were both in use at the time and both were refered to as broigne, brunne, bronja, brunia, etc etc.

Quote:
and there are some authors of the late 20th cent. arguing for the existence of this type of armour in the 1200`s, being an intermediate form between mail and scale.
Obviously false since there is more than enough evidence to show that scale was being used more than two thousand years earlier and mail was being used more than a thousand years earlier and both never stopped being used during that entire period.
Quote:
second, L. and F. Funcken e.g. in "le Costume, l'armure et les armes au temps de la chevalerie" argue against artistic license, because there are pictorial evidences that show both types in the same picture, disproving the theory
There are two more likely explainations. 1. The illustration was done by two or more different artists. 2. The artist is trying to show two different types of mail. There are plenty of texts indicating that there were many different types of mail in use all at the same time. Unfortunately none of them refer to this imaginary ring armour. The other problem with this theory is that when the inside of the armour is illustrated you can still see the links.

Quote:
second, L. and F. Funcken e.g. in "le Costume, l'armure et les armes au temps de la chevalerie" argue against artistic license, because there are pictorial evidences that show both types in the same picture, disproving the theory, that the artist just wanted to save time by painting "stylised" mail.
and there is a book by F. Buttin "Du costume militaire au moyen age et pendant la renaissance" (1971), which i didn`t read first hand, but it is said, his arguments for broigne are based on studies of literaric contemporary sources, like byzantine Anna Komnena (Alexiad e.g.)

All those texts are describing mail. Nothing else. I've personally translated large swaths of Anna Comnena and can tell you that the terms she uses can only be translated as "mail" or "armour". Nothing else.

Quote:
and third, there are only few surviving examples of 12th cent. mail, maybe broignes just did not survive, being held together by leather or cloth. lack of evidence does not mean evidence of lack.

Yeah. They had shurikens and nunchukas too but none have survived.

The above construction doesn't even work. The most common threat at the time was from arrows and spears. If that armour was hit with either of those weapons, then 50% of the time it would miss the reinforcing completely. Maybe that's why none are left today. They only made one suit because the boofhead who wore it got killed in the first five minutes of his ffirst battle.

This is what the artists are trying to illustrate. Just plain regular 4-in-1 mail. Matt posted this years ago. The banding effect is quite obvious in the right light.



 Attachment: 35.51 KB
mail-banded.jpg

View user's profile Send private message
Werner Stiegler





Joined: 27 Feb 2007

Posts: 122

PostPosted: Sat 05 Feb, 2011 5:46 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quinn W. wrote:

Do you mean like that thing William Marshall wore in The latest Robin Hood film? If so, it's interesting how inaccuracies are perpetuated.
No, it looked nothing like that. What they came up with was a suit of circular scales overlapping from left to right. It kinda turned out like a wierd fusion of 18th century indian armour and: "this we saw on the Bayreux Tapestry!". I think they used it in a movie about the Crusades made during the 80s though.
View user's profile Send private message
Gottfried P. Doerler




Location: Tyrol, Austria
Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Likes: 4 pages

Posts: 228

PostPosted: Sat 05 Feb, 2011 8:55 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Gottfried P. Doerler wrote:
first, the words "broigne" or "byrnie" are ethymologicly related to german "brünne" the latter at least rather refering to some sort of scale armour, worn at the age of charlemagne.

No the term just means "armour", not a specific type of armour. Mail and scale were both in use at the time and both were refered to as broigne, brunne, bronja, brunia, etc etc.


ooops, you are right (brünne). Thought, i knew my native tongue better Worried

Quote:
I've personally translated large swaths of Anna Comnena

wow, thats amazing, and
Quote:
and can tell you that the terms she uses can only be translated as "mail" or "armour". Nothing else.

convincing. Big Grin

edit: yeah, my 100th post. Laughing Out Loud
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Sat 05 Feb, 2011 2:19 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Like Dan is saying I do not know of any people who study armour in academics that think this type of armour was used in medieval europe. Just another show of mail armour. It seems to go back to loose/poor interpretations by scholars of the mid to late 19th century. Sadly D and D ran with some of this so it got even further reach...

Sadly terms used simply as armour are fairly common during the medival period and without further info we just have to go with what it seems the words was used for most often in that time.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Johann M




Location: London
Joined: 23 Aug 2007

Posts: 27

PostPosted: Sun 06 Feb, 2011 5:28 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Yeah, Robin Hood annoyed the hell out of me. Not sure why. I loved Braveheart, Kingdom of Heaven, and even 13th Warrior. King Arthur is probably the only "historical" movie that annoyed me more.


I'd argue that the schizophrenic script was "Robin Hoods" downfall (history issues aside).
View user's profile Send private message
Nat Lamb




Location: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 15 Jan 2009
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 385

PostPosted: Sun 06 Feb, 2011 5:39 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Yeah, Robin Hood annoyed the hell out of me. Not sure why. I loved Braveheart, Kingdom of Heaven, and even 13th Warrior. King Arthur is probably the only "historical" movie that annoyed me more.


You mean it wasn't common in the period for enamy comanders to charge each other up a litereal mountain of bodies once each of their armies were totaly destroyed?
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > can say something about this armor
Page 1 of 2 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum