Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Segmented Globose Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2  Next 
Author Message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Sun 09 Sep, 2007 6:52 pm    Post subject: Segmented Globose         Reply with quote

I just want some input on this type of body armour - otherwise know as a corrazina. I've been researching it alot lately, but haven't come up with a definitive (if there is such a thing) answer, so I'll put the question to the good folks here.

For the late 14th century (c. 1380-85), would the segmented globose have been made up of simply a breast and back plate, covered in cloth w/faulds, split up the middle and back à la brigandine, or made up of many different plates (particularly the back plates)? I'll attach images to show what I'm talking about.

The full back and breast would be easiest, of course, to make (I'm lazy, if you didnt already know), but I want to remain as close to historically accurate as possible, within budgetary and safety constraints. Keep in mind I'm already fairly certain that the plate faulds (more like tassets, actually) aren't correct - correct me if I'm wrong - so I'd go with the horizontal lames.

Cheers!



 Attachment: 98.21 KB
redglobose_hi.jpg
full front with backplate

 Attachment: 76.57 KB
blacktrans_hi.jpg
split front and back

 Attachment: 68.86 KB
corrazina5.jpg
Many back plates

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Sun 09 Sep, 2007 9:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Segmented Globose         Reply with quote

Jason G. Smith wrote:
I just want some input on this type of body armour - otherwise know as a corrazina. I've been researching it alot lately, but haven't come up with a definitive (if there is such a thing) answer, so I'll put the question to the good folks here.

For the late 14th century (c. 1380-85), would the segmented globose have been made up of simply a breast and back plate, covered in cloth w/faulds, split up the middle and back à la brigandine, or made up of many different plates (particularly the back plates)? I'll attach images to show what I'm talking about.

The full back and breast would be easiest, of course, to make (I'm lazy, if you didnt already know), but I want to remain as close to historically accurate as possible, within budgetary and safety constraints. Keep in mind I'm already fairly certain that the plate faulds (more like tassets, actually) aren't correct - correct me if I'm wrong - so I'd go with the horizontal lames.

Cheers!


Hi Jason,

That type of armor, which has come to be known as corrazina on the internet (a term with no valid basis I've been able to find) is perfectly authentic for the latter quarter of the 14th century.

The two examples you showed a figure of were built by a man named Chris Gilman of North Hollywood, California, and those pictures came off of his company's web page.

The one that's split up the front is copied from a velvet-covered globose-breasted coat of plates in the Met in NYC. The piece is a nightmare of innacuracy because it was assembled by a man named Bashford Dean (a paleontologist by trade!) from bits and pieces of armor, and even random plates, he found in a treasure trove in Chalcis. You're right when you say the fauld is innacurate: It should have a hoop fauld much like the solid breastplate version (except split). The harness is probably northern Italian.

I don't know of many good examples of what this breastplate should look like, but my friend Will McLean had a copy many years ago made by Robert MacPherson, one of or perhaps the premier armorer in the world. Here's an unfortunately not so great picture of Will in his armor from that time:
http://www.thehojos.com/~stmikes/galhouse.GIF
(I'm the one in the hounskull visor to his right).

The solid breastplate piece is copied from an extant breasplate in the Bayerisches Museum in Munich and is probably of northern Italian manufacture also.

Robert MacPherson built a copy of this piece for Will McLean. Here you can see the front of the breastplate:
http://www.historiclife.com/images/SCA/Pennsi...upshot.jpg
(The fellow to Will's immediate right is the same man in the two breastplates you posted, Chris Gilman, and I am the next one to Chris' right).

And here's a picture of the back:
http://bp3.blogger.com/_6FQ292nJph0/RehllENhX...will4.jpeg
Note that the center back plates can be removed and the harness can be worn without it. This back design came from a misericorde in Lincoln Cathedral:
http://photofile.ru/users/arssenicum/1278473/47943921/full_image/
The idea for not using a solid backplate came from viewing many pieces of 14th-century art (usually Italian since most others tended to wear armorial garments over their armor) which showed that instead of a solid backplate such as we see in 15th-century sources, you often (usually?) see side flaps like the ones on Will's harness then considering the misericorde shown above.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin


myArmoury Admin

PostPosted: Sun 09 Sep, 2007 9:22 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Shown here is an example found at The Bayerisches Nationalmuseum.




.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Sun 09 Sep, 2007 11:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I think this would be the more common type of armour among Men at arms but have no way to prove it besides the fact that the Coat of Plates or Pair of Plates seems to have been more common into the 2nd hald of the 14th. AS the Last picture posted by Nathan shows the full on globoses get fabric covers as well as the seperated plates.

As far as what form they would have. TO me this is the development to the brigandine and coat of plates or breastplate from the coat of plates. You are usually going from larger plates of various numbers to smaller ones of more number for brigandines or larger even plates of less to one in number.

THe backplate is a hotly argued ticket. I think that likely by the late 14th one was in existance as Blair states in his great book on armour. Some people deeply disagree and push it to 1410 or even later which I find highly problematic. By 1402 backplates pop into inventories but if they developed from the parts of a coat of plate they never had to mention backplates before and that evolution would take time as well. There were solid breastplates bu the 1360's used without backplates as the Pistoia Alterpiece shows (one man's back is clearly shown). The Lincoln Choir has a carving of the fall of a knight (pride I believe) who shows multiple pieces backplates overlapping as well and is second half od the 14th.

Hugh,

Corraza or one of its close spelling variants certainly is accurate a term. It is usually only used in italy and somewhat in Frane but certainly is historic.

From the Getty MS of Fiore on poleaxe armoured, verse 35.

'Io son posta breve la Serpentina che megliore d'le altre me tegno. A chi darò mia punta ben gli parerà lo segno. Questa punta si è forte per passare coraze e panceroni, deffendeti che voglio far la prova.

Posta breve serpentina.'

I enboldened it with some reassuring words Big Grin

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Sun 09 Sep, 2007 11:56 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:
Hugh,

Corraza or one of its close spelling variants certainly is accurate a term. It is usually only used in italy and somewhat in Frane but certainly is historic.

From the Getty MS of Fiore on poleaxe armoured, verse 35.

'Io son posta breve la Serpentina che megliore d'le altre me tegno. A chi darò mia punta ben gli parerà lo segno. Questa punta si è forte per passare coraze e panceroni, deffendeti che voglio far la prova.

Posta breve serpentina.'

I enboldened it with some reassuring words Big Grin


The *term* was used in period, certainly, but while I don't speak or read Italian those who do tell me the term was used for a much broader class of body armor than the way the Internet Crowd have used it--i.e., for the globose-breasted coat of plates.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 1:52 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh,

That is true. It seems to almost always refer to a multi piece cuirass. My guess is anything from a more tubular Coat of Plates to a very well fit one like these.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 2:05 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:
That is true. It seems to almost always refer to a multi piece cuirass. My guess is anything from a more tubular Coat of Plates to a very well fit one like these.


See? I read a book once. Not bad for an amateur! Cool

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 5:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh,

No it is good. Big Grin I have to read the same book a few times to get it right at times. Getting it right on the first try is always good. Laughing Out Loud

There is danger is applying any medieval term too specifically unless you can be sure it was not in broader use or the opposite. I agree that this term has become synonymous with the globose like coat of plates harness over them in general which is incorrect. Part is reenactors not wanting to call them coat of plates.It is sad as coraza and many of its other spellings sound so cool. To be honest I really like latin and the latin based languages so I am partial to them.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 8:08 am    Post subject: Re: Segmented Globose         Reply with quote

Hugh Knight wrote:

Hi Jason,

That type of armor, which has come to be known as corrazina on the internet (a term with no valid basis I've been able to find) is perfectly authentic for the latter quarter of the 14th century.

The two examples you showed a figure of were built by a man named Chris Gilman of North Hollywood, California, and those pictures came off of his company's web page.


I have no real clue as to where the images came from - they've been floating around on my computer for some time, the fruit of a Google image search. Thanks for the info!

Hugh Knight wrote:

The one that's split up the front is copied from a velvet-covered globose-breasted coat of plates in the Met in NYC. The piece is a nightmare of innacuracy because it was assembled by a man named Bashford Dean (a paleontologist by trade!) from bits and pieces of armor, and even random plates, he found in a treasure trove in Chalcis. You're right when you say the fauld is innacurate: It should have a hoop fauld much like the solid breastplate version (except split). The harness is probably northern Italian.

I don't know of many good examples of what this breastplate should look like, but my friend Will McLean had a copy many years ago made by Robert MacPherson, one of or perhaps the premier armorer in the world. Here's an unfortunately not so great picture of Will in his armor from that time:
http://www.thehojos.com/~stmikes/galhouse.GIF
(I'm the one in the hounskull visor to his right).


That's a really sweet piece. I noticed in the image from the back that it strikingly resembles the way a coat of plates is tied/attached/hung from the body. Interesting, given the evolution.

Hugh Knight wrote:

The solid breastplate piece is copied from an extant breasplate in the Bayerisches Museum in Munich and is probably of northern Italian manufacture also.


Any date on this piece? I've seen it before - in color (I'll have to dig up the pic somewhere) and it is a beautiful piece. I simply assumed it was later period, but of course I'm often wrong... Happy

Hugh Knight wrote:

And here's a picture of the back:
http://bp3.blogger.com/_6FQ292nJph0/RehllENhX...will4.jpeg
Note that the center back plates can be removed and the harness can be worn without it. This back design came from a misericorde in Lincoln Cathedral:
http://photofile.ru/users/arssenicum/1278473/47943921/full_image/
The idea for not using a solid backplate came from viewing many pieces of 14th-century art (usually Italian since most others tended to wear armorial garments over their armor) which showed that instead of a solid backplate such as we see in 15th-century sources, you often (usually?) see side flaps like the ones on Will's harness then considering the misericorde shown above.


I'd seen that image before - but since we see the back and not the front of the breastplate, I assumed it was some kind of brigandine, and not a globose type BP. This is very interesting indeed. Thank you!

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 8:13 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:
I think this would be the more common type of armour among Men at arms but have no way to prove it besides the fact that the Coat of Plates or Pair of Plates seems to have been more common into the 2nd hald of the 14th. AS the Last picture posted by Nathan shows the full on globoses get fabric covers as well as the seperated plates.

...snip...

THe backplate is a hotly argued ticket. I think that likely by the late 14th one was in existance as Blair states in his great book on armour. Some people deeply disagree and push it to 1410 or even later which I find highly problematic. By 1402 backplates pop into inventories but if they developed from the parts of a coat of plate they never had to mention backplates before and that evolution would take time as well. There were solid breastplates bu the 1360's used without backplates as the Pistoia Alterpiece shows (one man's back is clearly shown). The Lincoln Choir has a carving of the fall of a knight (pride I believe) who shows multiple pieces backplates overlapping as well and is second half od the 14th.


Which is where some of my confusion comes from, I guess. They're covering everything with fabric, but which ones were extant to which periods? What you're saying, then, is that it is your belief that the full-on backplate was used in this time period (late 14th century, c. 1485)? It would seem to make sense that as they moved to a full breastplate, the backplate would have followed in kind. Thanks for the input!

Cheers!

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 8:16 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nathan Robinson wrote:
Shown here is an example found at The Bayerisches Nationalmuseum.


Nevermind - I saw the date in the caption. 1340 - 1400. Quite a large time frame - is there anyone who can do better? Happy

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 8:32 am    Post subject: Re: Segmented Globose         Reply with quote

Jason G. Smith wrote:

I'd seen that image before - but since we see the back and not the front of the breastplate, I assumed it was some kind of brigandine, and not a globose type BP. This is very interesting indeed. Thank you!


My bad - it wasn't that image at all, but rather another similar type of torso protection exposed in Milan. You can see the images here:
http://hermineradieuse.aceboard.fr/14766-5135...azina.htm

The extensive use of mail is the notable difference for this piece. It's dated 1380 - 1410. Any ideas on the provenance and/or how widespread something like this was? It seems like a compromise or hybrid piece. I'd heard of sewing mail sleeves onto a brigandine before, but this is one step beyond...

Another note - it would seem that Corrazina, or Corraze (which is probably the better form of the word) translates to Cuirass. My being French tells me that's about right, although I hadn't noticed until someone pointed it out. So the term would have probably been used to denote pretty much any torso armour. Corrazina would better translate to Cuirassin, which is a kind of brigandine, COP thing. I just thought I'd share. Happy

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 11:16 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jason,

I do think the backplate was developing toward a complete one by the end of the 14th. If would seem odd if the breastplate developed by 1340 went 60 years with the backplate remaining static. Now it makes sense for the frontal armour to evolve faster or before the rear... that usually is where the attacks come from.

The fabric covering is hard to tell. Sometimes you luck out with very detailed depictions with rivit heads. Nothing really changed from before as the surcoat the jupon becomes common so torso armour can sometimes be challenging until the 1420's for this...

Corrazzina is just a diminutive of coraza just as the words in french you have listed. coraza seems to depict the multiplated versions as well so not sure if the terms can be used so. WHile it possibly could be used for other torso armours it does not seem to be, at least from the accounts that I have seen. I think there is a medieval italian dictionary about that would explain it better.

Cheers

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:
I do think the backplate was developing toward a complete one by the end of the 14th. If would seem odd if the breastplate developed by 1340 went 60 years with the backplate remaining static. Now it makes sense for the frontal armour to evolve faster or before the rear... that usually is where the attacks come from.


Hi Randall,

We know that the breastplate was often worn without a backplate because we see numerous examples of it in the iconography; the Pistoia alterpiece is a great example.

What's more, there's good evidence to suggest that when the backplate actually was worn it didn't start out as a solid piece like the front but was rather built up in pieces like the example from the Lincoln Cathedral I posted the link to. Robert MacPerhson did a lot of research before making Will McLean's breastplate (the red one I posted the links to) and he found that when the iconography actually shows a back without a gown over it it often was side plates rather than a solid back. I don't have many of the pictures of this on my computer (although we looked at dosens of examples in books in Mac's shop) but I'll post a picture from the Netherlands c. 1410 that sort of shows it. Look at the bottom figure with his back to us--you'll have to look closely to see it, but his armor is clearly divided up the back.



 Attachment: 41.83 KB
Froissart Netherlands 1410 E.jpg


Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Randall Moffett




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

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 1:04 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh,

Yep I have seen a number of them like that as well. My point was that I'd be suprised in a one piece one did not exist before 1400. I am sure it would not be universal for some time. My main point was that it would be odd for it to be so far behind the breastplate but as the breastplate it had to develope and pass through different stages so did the backplate, likely with various systems and designs until the one or two main styles of solid back plate, a solid one piece and solid multiple plate one won out.

There are actually very few depictions I have seen where the man can clearly be shown wearing a breastplate without a backplate so I think the pistoia depiction while showing it used is likely one of a few not may. It is just recently that the idea has been put out it was common, likely along the same lines as why everyone wears the churburg 13 breastplate instead of the 14...

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Jason G. Smith




Location: Quebec
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 1:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hugh Knight wrote:

What's more, there's good evidence to suggest that when the backplate actually was worn it didn't start out as a solid piece like the front but was rather built up in pieces like the example from the Lincoln Cathedral I posted the link to. Robert MacPerhson did a lot of research before making Will McLean's breastplate (the red one I posted the links to) and he found that when the iconography actually shows a back without a gown over it it often was side plates rather than a solid back. I don't have many of the pictures of this on my computer (although we looked at dosens of examples in books in Mac's shop) but I'll post a picture from the Netherlands c. 1410 that sort of shows it. Look at the bottom figure with his back to us--you'll have to look closely to see it, but his armor is clearly divided up the back.


Indeed, it would seem to be split up the back. Another feature I had never noticed before - at least until I saw Will with it on his breastplate was the little dip in the front of the fauld. And now, looking at the image you just posted, I see it clear as day. What's even more astonishing is that detail escaped me until now, and I've probably seen that image numerous times. You learn something every day! Thanks again, guys!

Les Maîtres d'Armes
Member of the
Chivalric Fighting Arts Association

... above all, you should feel in your conscience that your quarrel is good and just. - Le Jeu de la Hache
View user's profile Send private message
Felix R.




Location: Germany
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Reading list: 25 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 555

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 1:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The dip shows quite nicely how the crotch was protected. I wondered always why the crotch was so open, while leg harness and hosen gave protection to the legs and upper armour to the rest of the body, this area only had braies and little padding with maille. On the other hand while sitting on the horse the saddle would be enough to fulfill that task. Bat while fighting on foot? Eek!
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 2:29 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Felix R. wrote:
The dip shows quite nicely how the crotch was protected. I wondered always why the crotch was so open, while leg harness and hosen gave protection to the legs and upper armour to the rest of the body, this area only had braies and little padding with maille. On the other hand while sitting on the horse the saddle would be enough to fulfill that task. Bat while fighting on foot? Eek!


Well, remember that these sorts of things are fairly uncommon and only show up for a relatively short period of time. Most armor didn't cover the groin this way.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Felix R.




Location: Germany
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Reading list: 25 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 555

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 3:01 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

But is this uncovered groin more or less mostly associated with horsemens armour?
View user's profile Send private message
Hugh Knight




Location: San Bernardino, CA
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Reading list: 34 books

Posts: 739

PostPosted: Mon 10 Sep, 2007 3:34 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Felix R. wrote:
But is this uncovered groin more or less mostly associated with horsemens armour?


It's not associated with either. Most 15th-century harnesses didn't have a different breastplate for fighting on foot or horseback. You might change the pauldrons or helmet, but the breastplate (and fauld) was the same.

For example, look at this picture from the Paulus Kal Fechtbuch:
http://mdz10.bib-bvb.de/~db/bsb00001840/image...p;seite=15
This is his mounted harness, he's about to get on his horse.

Compare that with this picture from the same Fechtbuch:
http://mdz10.bib-bvb.de/~db/bsb00001840/image...p;seite=44

He's now fighting on foot, yet you can see that the same cutout exists in the front of the fauld.

Then here you see a harness for a fight that *started* on foot (since it's with pollaxes), and the harness still has a cut out over the groin:
http://mdz10.bib-bvb.de/~db/bsb00001840/image...p;seite=84

Here's another example of a harness for a fight that starts on foot, and still the groin is uncovered:
http://base.kb.dk/pls/hsk_web/hsk_vis.side?p_...p_lang=eng

The English during the Wars of the Roses tended to favor harnesses with longer faulds than were seen on the continent, much like the one in the picture I sent but without the "dip". Note, however, that these were the same harnesses used for riding:
http://www.mbs-brasses.co.uk/pic_lib/Chalfont_St_Peter_Brass.htm

Now, there *were* some armors that covered the groin after the period we were discussing that were used for foot combat, such as this one:
http://sl-armours.com/patterns/henryviii_1514_tonlet_harness.jpg
But such armors were for specialized friendly combats (and 16th-century, too!).

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Segmented Globose
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 2003-2019 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum