Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Effectiveness of armor against native american weapons Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2  Next 
Author Message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Wed 12 Jun, 2013 9:13 pm    Post subject: Effectiveness of armor against native american weapons         Reply with quote

How effective were diffirent forms of armor against the weapons used by native Americans?
Reading through "Conquest of the Incas", it seems like Spanish armor was extremely effective against Inca weapons.
But I've also heard of mail armor being pierced by native weapons in North America. Does anyone know more about this?
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




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

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,204

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 3:23 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

An arrow, where it finds no mail, pierces as deeply as a crossbow ... For the most part when they strike upon mail, they break at the place where they are bound together. Those of cane split and pierce a coat of mail, causing more injury than the other.

-- "The Gentleman of Elvas”
View user's profile Send private message
Tanner Sheltry




Location: Oklahoma
Joined: 08 Apr 2013

Posts: 23

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 8:39 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The sling is extremely effective as long as they are hit in the head, if they are hit in the body it's still enough to break ribs and cause internal bleeding. They rang is as much as a bow and they are cheaper to make. They do take a lot of training to use effectively. In the hands of the incas they were far more accurate than the conquistadors muskets.
the more skill a man has with his weapon the more gentle and courteous should he behave, for in truth this is rightly the honour of a brave Gentleman, and so much more is he to be esteemed: he must not be a bragger, or lier, and without truth in his word, because there is nothing more to be required of a man than to know himself" - Vincentio Saviolo
View user's profile Send private message
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 8:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
An arrow, where it finds no mail, pierces as deeply as a crossbow ... For the most part when they strike upon mail, they break at the place where they are bound together. Those of cane split and pierce a coat of mail, causing more injury than the other.

-- "The Gentleman of Elvas”

I've seen several translations of this passage. One says the cane arrows "split apart and enter through the links of mail."
I'm not sure if it's saying the arrows can punch through mail, or break apart and travel between the rings.
Do you know which translation is most accurate?
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 10:48 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

If it is Latin or Spanish I'll have a look at it.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Mart Shearer




Location: Jackson, MS, USA
Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posts: 1,280

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 11:24 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Relaçom Verdadeira, Fidalgo de Elvas, 1557, Evora in Portuguese. Chapter 8 contains the passage.

The 1611 English printing of Richard Hakluyt, under the title Virginia Richly Valued by the Description of the Mainland of Florida (first printed 1609).


Quote:
An arrow, where it findeth no armour, pierceth as deepely as a crossebow. Their bowes are very long, and their arrows are made of certain canes like reedes, very heavie, and so strong, that a sharpe cane passeth thorow a target; some they arme in the point with a sharpe bone of a fish like a chisel, and in others they fasten certaine stones like points of diamants. For the most part, when they light upon an armour, they breake in the place where they are bound together. Those of cane do split and pierce a coate of maile, and are more hurtfull then the other.


There is a 1930s translation by Alexander Robertson which might be more faithful to the original.

ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
View user's profile Send private message
Josh Wilson




Location: WV
Joined: 01 Nov 2010
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 140

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 12:25 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjV7lYP6hRw
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,192

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 2:47 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Atlatls are tricky because of the dramatic difference in published performance metrics. Tests conducted by Wallace Karl Hutchings report kinetic energy figures ranging from 120-360+ J, while experienced atlatl enthusiasts John Whittaker and Bob Berg only manage 25-43 J. Given what we know about bows and javelins, I find Whittaker's number implausible for military atlatl performance and suspect the Hutchings tests reflect historical levels. Even a 80lb composite bow - generally considered the minimum for a competent soldier - should deliver at least 60 J. Everything indicates military javelins struck with 100-200+ J; we know for sure that Olympic javelin throwers get up to 360 J with relatively light javelins. Bernal Diaz and Garcilaso de la Vega would not have expressed such respect for a weapon inferior to the weakest bows on the battlefield. Diaz did unambiguously write that Mesoamerican darts could pierce any armor. De la Vega wrote that atlatl darts could pierce a coat of mail on both sides, though I've only read that passage in English translation. On the broader question, de la Vega gave various acconts of Amerindian arrows piercing mail. Cabeza de Vaca wrote that good armor did no good against Amerindian arrows, which implies that the arrows penetrated. In both Diaz and Cabeza de Vaca, it's not clear which types of armor they meant. I have trouble believing obsidan-tipped darts could pierce steel plate, so I bet Diaz had cotton and perhaps mail armor in mind.

On the whole, my reading of Spanish accounts of the so-called New World indicates that plate armor granted near immunity to Amerindian arms. This only stands to reason, as it did the same in Europe with the possible exception of heavy staff weapons like the halberd. Thick quilted cotton armor gave considerable protection but failed against atlatl darts and arrows from powerful bows. (It probably also performed notably worse against sharp steel, though few Amerindians had access to steel weapons in the sixteenth century.) Mail did little if any better than fabric armor and possibly worse.

Read my historically inspired fantasy fiction in here. I walk along a winding path set by Ludovico Ariosto, William Morris, J. R. R. Tolkien, and Ursula Le Guin.

Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jojo Zerach





Joined: 26 Dec 2009

Posts: 288

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 5:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for the information.
The list of equipment for Coronado's expedition here shows that those conquistadors actually had very little plate armor.
http://www.nps.gov/cabr/historyculture/conquistador-clothing.htm
Out of 225 horsemen, only 9 would have had extensive plate armor. (Including Coronado) Most would have had quilted armor, leather, or sleeveless mail.
For the 62 infantry there was only one 3/4 armor, the rest having either leather jackets or quilted cotton armor.
Overall they seem to have been pretty lightly armored.
Is it possible the Spanish in South America were more heavily armored than those in North America? At the siege of Cuzco for instance, armored Spanish horsemen seem to have been nearly immune to direct attack by Inca weapons.
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Thu 13 Jun, 2013 7:12 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jojo,

Not sure those numbers are quite the full story though.

There is enough padded armour for the whole group. Then you you have 55 mail coats on top of that and 65 leather jerkins. Think layered defenses there. I'd be first to say they were not armed as well as the guys with the full plate but as far as protection but they were pretty well equipped.

The infantry, yep pretty light.

I think it may in deed be that the other groups had more gear. Remember the others more or less knew they were going to fight. Coronado was more a search.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Travis Canaday




Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Joined: 24 Oct 2005

Posts: 144

PostPosted: Fri 14 Jun, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:

On the whole, my reading of Spanish accounts of the so-called New World indicates that plate armor granted near immunity to Amerindian arms. This only stands to reason, as it did the same in Europe with the possible exception of heavy staff weapons like the halberd.


That's a good point.

In regards to non-plate armor, some Natives seemed quite capable penetration with their arrows.

The Frenchman Jean De Lery made some interesting descriptions of Tupinamba weapons and combat in his book History of a Voyage to the Land of Brazil. Some of which can be read on google books. In the book, which takes place around 1556, he describes their bows as being "so much longer and stronger than ours that one of our men could not begin to bend it, let alone shoot with it; on the contrary, he would have all he could manage with one used by the boys of nine or ten." (pg. 113-114) He then goes on to say that they "shoot so straight and rapidly that, with all due respect to the English (who are regarded as such good bowmen), our savages, holding their arrows in the same hand that holds the bow, will have sent off a dozen before the English have loosed six." (pg.114)

Now it is usually not a good idea to pay too much attention to what a Frenchman says about the English (and vice versa), but I think it's safe to say these Tupinamba guys were some bad ass bowmen. Probably shooting bows well above a hundred pound draws, on par with English war bows.

Although it's not relevant to the discussion of armor penetration, it is interesting to note that De Lery was also quite impressed by their skills at wielding their war clubs, which he refers to as swords because they had hard wood edges "almost as keen as an axe." (pg. 113) So impressed was he, that he thought "two of the most skillful swordsmen from over here would find themselves kept very busy if they were dealing with one of our furious Tupinamba with one of these [a war club] in his hand." (pg.113)

Cheers,

Travis
View user's profile Send private message
S Ghajar




Location: Fort Collins
Joined: 14 Jun 2013

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Fri 14 Jun, 2013 10:08 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Here is an excerpt from the writings of George Percy, a Jamestowne colonist.

The twentieth day of Werowance of Paspiha sent forty of his men with a Deer, to our quarter: but they came more in villainy than any love they bare us: they faine would have lain in our Fort all night, but we would not suffer them for fear of their treachery. One of our Gentlemen having a Target [meaning shield in this context] which he trusted in, thinking it would bear out a slight shot, he set it up against a tree, willing one of the Savages to shoot; who took from his back an Arrow of an elle long, drew it strongly in his Bow, shoots the Target a foot throw, or better: which was strange, being that a Pistol could not pierce it. We seeing the force of his Bow, afterwards set him up a steel Target; he shot again, and burst his arrow all to pieces, he presently pulled out another Arrow, and bit it in his teeth, and seemed to be in a great rage, so he went away in great anger.
[...]
Their Bows are made of tough Hasell, their strings of Leather, their Arrows of Canes or Hasell, headed with very sharp stones, and are made artificially like a broad Arrow: other some of their Arrows are headed with the ends of Deer's horns , and are feathered very artificially. Paspiha was as good as his word; for he sent Venison, but the Sawse came within few days after.



To summarize, a Powhatan bowman shot an arrow a foot through a shield that Percy said a pistol couldn't pierce. A steel shield shattered the next arrow. Incidentally, he was wrong about the "hasell" wood used for the bow--it was almost always black or yellow locust, though hickory was sometimes used.

Edit to add: Regarding cane arrows, part of the construction often involved putting a plug insert into the shaft, usually of hardwood, to which the arrowhead was secured. I imagine the reason for the splitting and wounding of cane with mail was due to the hardwood insert splitting the cane as it hit the mail.

For information on Native American bows and arrows, I really enjoy the book "Bows and Arrows of the Native Americans" by Jim Hamm--it has great information, pictures, and DIY on making the bows and arrows.

"This skill," asked Kazan, "is it the horse's or the man's?" "The man's, lord," they said. "No! If the horse did not play its part the man could not vaunt himself; the skill belongs to the horse."
Kitabi Dede Korkut
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,192

PostPosted: Sat 15 Jun, 2013 1:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Garcilaso de la Vega wrote similar accounts of Amerindian archery, such as that no Spaniard could fully draw Native bows. He made no explicit comparison to the English that I've seen, but did note the participation in later a battle of both a Spaniard raised in England and an Englishman who both used bows extensively. De la Vega made no distinction between Amerindian and English archery, apparently regarding the two as equivalent and interchangeable. I suspect many Amerindian warriors in what is now the U.S. Southeast drew bows approximately as powerful as those found on the Mary Rose. De la Vega's text additionally contains various accounts of Amerindian arrows piercing mail, including a test shoot against expensive polished mail placed on a basket. The Native archer in question penetrated both one and two coats. According to de la Vega, the Spaniards then held in contempt the fancy mail that they had previous valued and instead turned to fabric four-fingers thick to stop arrows. Rougher, cheaper mail with fabric underneath likewise provided decent protection.
Read my historically inspired fantasy fiction in here. I walk along a winding path set by Ludovico Ariosto, William Morris, J. R. R. Tolkien, and Ursula Le Guin.

Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Travis Canaday




Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Joined: 24 Oct 2005

Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun 16 Jun, 2013 8:51 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
I suspect many Amerindian warriors in what is now the U.S. Southeast drew bows approximately as powerful as those found on the Mary Rose.


Agreed. The peoples in the SE seemed to use similar long self-bows as the Tupinamba. Makes sense. Composite bows (made form organic materials) don't handle the humidity of the tropics and subtropics. I have a theory that the Tupinamba in question were probably using a type of palm wood. I have seen and handled bows and spears made of palm wood in the Peruvian Amazon and have been very impressed by the hardness, weight, and durability. I now wonder if those guys in the SE were using certain palm woods.

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
According to de la Vega, the Spaniards then held in contempt the fancy mail that they had previous valued and instead turned to fabric four-fingers thick to stop arrows. Rougher, cheaper mail with fabric underneath likewise provided decent protection.


I have also read that account. Interesting.

Cheers,

Travis
View user's profile Send private message
Josh Wilson




Location: WV
Joined: 01 Nov 2010
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 140

PostPosted: Mon 17 Jun, 2013 10:49 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
The Native archer in question penetrated both one and two coats. According to de la Vega, the Spaniards then held in contempt the fancy mail that they had previous valued and instead turned to fabric four-fingers thick to stop arrows. Rougher, cheaper mail with fabric underneath likewise provided decent protection.


WTF?! Eek!

Quote:
I can't put my arms down!


I'd be interested in seeing that armour. Just looking at my hand, that looks like 4 inches thick. I can't imagine trying to fight in 4 inch thick padding. I'm sure it was horrible to wear in the heat as well!
View user's profile Send private message
Mart Shearer




Location: Jackson, MS, USA
Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posts: 1,280

PostPosted: Mon 17 Jun, 2013 1:19 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The passage from Garcilaso's El Florida del Inca can be found on pp.156-7, Chapter 18: http://www.scribd.com/doc/14659502/Inca-Garci...a-Del-Inca

Quote:
Fue así que, en una de las primeras refriegas que los españoles tuvieron con los indios de Apalache, sacó el maese de campo Luis de Moscoso un flechazo en el costado derecho que le pasó una cuera de ante y otra de malla que llevaba debajo, que, por ser tan pulida,había costado en España ciento y cincuenta ducados, y de éstas habían llevado muchas los hombres ricos por muy estimadas. También le pasó la flecha un jubón estofado y lo hirió de manera que, por ser a soslayo, no lo mató. Los españoles, admirados de un golpe de flecha tan extraño, quisieron ver para cuánto eran sus cotas, las muy pulidas en quien tanta confianza tenían. Llegados que, si de la otra parte topara un hombre, también lo pasara.

Los españoles, viendo la poca o ninguna defensa que una cota hacía contra una flecha, quisieronver lo que hacían dos cotas, y así mandaron vestir otra muy preciada sobre lambre para pasarlas ambas.El indio, volviendo a sacudir los brazos como que les pedía nuevas fuerzas, pues le doblaban las defensas contrarias, desembrazó la flecha y dio en las cotassalió de las cotas como la primera."afrenta de sus cotas, y de allí adelante quedaron bien desengañados de lo poco defensiva; y las cotas deadelante en los lugares donde acaecieron que cierto son para admirar.Mas al fin, considerando que estos indios son engendrados y nacidos sobre arcosy flechas, criados y alimentados de lo que con ellas matan y tan ejercitados enellas, no hay por qué maravillarnos tanto.


While in the territory of the Apalache (modern day Florida panhandle), the Maestro de Campo, Luis de Moscoso receives an arrow wound to the side which penetrates a suede leather coat (una cuera de ante) and another of mail (otra de malla) beneath. The mail is finely burnished and expensive, costing 150 ducats, and is the type worn by many gentlemen. The arrow also penetrates a jupon (un jubón) and wounds him, though not fatally. The Spanish are surprised that a shot could penetrate such a high quality coat of mail, which was held in high esteem. (Garcilaso had previously dismissed the rank and file's "poor and rusty shirts of mail".) They repeat the test with two coats, and the arrow penetrates but doesn't exit through the 4 layers which angers the Indian.

Quote:
Los españoles no quisieron conceder la petición del indio por no ver mayor afrenta de sus cotas, y de allí adelante quedaron bien desengañados de lo pocoque las muy estimadas les podían defender de las flechas. Y así, haciendo burlade ellas sus propios dueños, las llamaban holandas de Flandes, y, en lugar deellas, hicieron sayos estofados de tres y cuatro dedos en grueso, con faldamentoslargos que cubriesen los pechos y ancas del caballo, y estos sayos, hechos demantas, resistían mejor las flechas que otra alguna arma defensiva; y las cotas demalla gruesa y bastas que no eran tenidas en precio, con cualquier otra defensaque les pusiesen debajo, defendían las flechas mejor que las muy galanas y pulidas, por lo cual vinieron a ser estimadas las que habían sido menospreciadasy desechadas las muy tenidas.


The padded armor made of Holland cloth or Flanders, padded three or four fingers thick, was to cover the horses. The rough and coarse mail (las cotas de malla gruesa) which had previously been denigrated because it was cheap was found to be better protection.

ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




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

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,204

PostPosted: Mon 17 Jun, 2013 3:43 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Josh Wilson wrote:
I'd be interested in seeing that armour. Just looking at my hand, that looks like 4 inches thick. I can't imagine trying to fight in 4 inch thick padding.

He said "four fingers" not "four inches". It would be about 2.5-3 inches thick. In addition, the texts often confuse the thickness of the construction before and after quilting.

"The armor which they use in war are certain loose garments like doublets made of quilted cotton, a finger and a half thick, and sometimes two fingers; they are very strong."
-- Companion of Hernan Cortez

"Out of sacking or light linen cloths they make a kind of surcoat that they call escaupil. These fall below the knee, and sometimes to the calf. They are all stuffed with cotton, to the thickness of three fingers. The layers of cotton are quilted between folds of linen and sewed with rough thread…"
-- Aguado, History of Venezuela

So their armour actually consists of multiple layers of cotton or maguey fibre, or cotton stuffing, that starts out as being 3-4 fingers thick. This is then quilted, which compresses it down to a thickness of 1.5-2 fingers thick. Exactly like European padded jacks, which, according to the Royal Armouries, was proof against a Mary Rose longbow when worn over mail. The problem is that this combination would be 2-3 times heavier than a steel cuirass that could do the same thing.

Quote:
I'm sure it was horrible to wear in the heat as well!

The topic of heat keeps coming up and has never been an issue. We know that armour much heavier than anything taken to the Americas was worn in the arid regions of the Middle East for at least three thousand years. Heat wouldn't be a problem for either the Spanish or the Indians since they would be used to it. I can wear heavy armour all day in the middle of an Australian summer with no difficulty. I have more trouble with 10-15 degree days than 30-35 dgree days. Acclimatisation matters a lot.
View user's profile Send private message
Elling Polden




Location: Bergen, Norway
Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Likes: 1 page

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,576

PostPosted: Tue 18 Jun, 2013 3:14 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

One interesting thing here; Did armour use linger longer in the americas, or did it disappear when it fell out of favour back home?
If bowmen where a huge threat, would we not see 17th century frontiersmen equiped with layered armour and bourgonets?

"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Matthew Amt




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

Posts: 1,307

PostPosted: Tue 18 Jun, 2013 7:15 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Elling Polden wrote:
One interesting thing here; Did armour use linger longer in the americas, or did it disappear when it fell out of favour back home?
If bowmen where a huge threat, would we not see 17th century frontiersmen equiped with layered armour and bourgonets?


As I understand from the interpreters at Jamestown, armor became very popular there. John Smith was captured when his unarmored patrol was attacked and wiped out--he was the only survivor. A year or two later, an armored patrol was attacked, and suffered no casualties while wiping out the Indians. I got to participate with the folks at Jamestown Fort during the 400th anniversary in 2007, and actually felt kind of exposed with *just* a back and breast and a helmet! I really wanted to add tassets, at least.

I *believe* that most of the Indian threat in Virginia was gone by the time of the English Civil War, so it's not like the common use of armor went on significantly longer than it did in Europe. But I'm a little hazy on the later 17th century in the Colonies, so I could be wrong about that.

Matthew
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,192

PostPosted: Tue 18 Jun, 2013 9:16 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Yes, four fingers, not four inches. Sorry about that slip. However, I'm not convinced that writers like de la Vega and Bernal Díaz del Castillo were talking about the thickness before quilting when they referred to such armors. Díaz mentioned soldiers wearing cotton armor thick enough to be proof against all arrows and very heavy. I haven't seen this passage in Spanish, but I suspect the translation is reasonably accurate. This calls into question the commonly held thesis that the Spanish adopted Native cotton armor because it was lighter than plate or mail. I gather that cotton armor came in different thickness depending on the desired level of protection. Many suits were lighter than most plate armor; others, designed for maximum protection, were quite heavy.

Regarding the longevity of armor, in what is now the U.S. Southwest and Great Plains, leather armor remained important through the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Both Native and Spanish combatant at times employed personal and horse armor. The gun's ability to penetrate leather and other hide or fabric armors in part accounts for the advantage it gave in these conflicts.

Read my historically inspired fantasy fiction in here. I walk along a winding path set by Ludovico Ariosto, William Morris, J. R. R. Tolkien, and Ursula Le Guin.

Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Effectiveness of armor against native american weapons
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