i've found this photo in the book "Arms and Armour of the Medieval Knight" of D. Edge & J. M. Paddock and was intrigued by the chasseau of the knight: normally I would dismiss them as a stylization of a classical chain mail... pardon, of a classical "mail"... ;) ... but the artist is clearly capable of represent this in manner more familiar, as show in the hauberk.

So is this a true ring armour? From the way they bend around the ties it appears that the chasseau are flexible, like a tissue...

I apologize in advance if this was ever discussed, but I can't find a reference

[ Linked Image ]

You can't make ring armour look like this illustration. Mail is actually more flexible than ring armour can ever be and is the only metallic armour that could possibly conform around the feet in this way. Note also the fastenings at the back of the calves - the only armour fastened in this manner is mail.

I'd suggest two possible explanations for the difference between the two parts of armour shown:

1) The artist wished to make the piece more visually appealing by less repetition. For instance the Bayeux tapestry has a tremendous variety of representations of mail.

2) The mail on the legs is of a different type. Such as bigger rings; it isn't double mail like the hauberk etc. This is necessarily speculative since we have too little data to associate and representation of mail with named type from period sources.

But I see no reason to think it is ring armour - in part for the reasons that Dan give - but also because there is simply no solid evidence of "ring" armour.

Cheers,
Steven

I agree with all above about it undoubtedly being mail. The time frame of the image and prevalent form of armour it should have depicted is not really in question. I am wondering if the orientation of the rings may have appeared differently there in actual use due to the tight fastening behind the calves. (I have not seen real period leggings and wonder if it may have made sense to change the weave orientation or "hang" due to the method of fastening.) The artist's attention to detail (scabbard and pommel details, overall scale of the primary subject) does seem very good even if stylistic composition was a likely factor.

It seems to me that the greaves in question are not even metal but very likely tooled leather. There are other pieces of art with simular outline to the greaves that have no ring based designs on them.

Perhaps the different representation is due to the mail leggins being more tight, so the single rings would stand up more than in the hauberk.
There is also the cloth leggins under the mail: they appear to report the motif of the hauberk...

Side issue: The horse's hoof loks like it has some sort of horse shoe with cleats or spikes.