Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Poisoned weapon use in medieval Europe Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next 
Author Message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Wed 29 Jun, 2022 11:46 am    Post subject: Poisoned weapon use in medieval Europe         Reply with quote

Somebody asked me if I knew of examples of the use of poisoned weapons in medieval Europe, and specifically by Europeans. The closest thing which occurred to me off hand were some descriptions of 'poisoned' weapons used by the Mongols, in incidents which actually sound like the use of biological weapons mentioned by Jan Dlugosz and other Latin sources as taking place during various battles with the Mongols and / or Tatars in the 13th-16th Centuries.

I know of course that biological based attacks, such as catapulting corpses over walls and so on, were quite common in siege warfare. And I have heard of things like the use of arsenic and other "chemical weapons" in siege warfare such as anti-tunneling efforts going back to Classical times. For example:

https://www.livescience.com/13113-ancient-chemical-warfare-romans-persians.html

But what these people are looking for are examples of the use of weapons in individual combat, with poison or toxic chemicals.

I assumed there would be some examples of this in Italy, where poisons seem to have been frequently used in assassinations and murders, but every example I could think of involved someone ingesting a poison. I know that effective, fast acting transdermal or injectable poisons are fairly rare even now, but a wound which eventually causes death or serious illness doesn't seem out of the question.

Does anyone here know of examples of the use of poisoned weapons in Europe between say 500 -1500 CE?

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




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

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,609

PostPosted: Wed 29 Jun, 2022 2:58 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It is impossible to know whether a text describing a wound from a poisoned weapon isn't really a simple incidental infection. We would need a text describing someone premeditatedly poisoning their weapon.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Sean Manning




Location: Austria
Joined: 23 Mar 2008

Posts: 732

PostPosted: Wed 29 Jun, 2022 3:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I can't think of anything from the ancient or medieval world either except for the rumours that Scythians poisoned their arrowheads. Because war arrows make small deep holes and the heads can become dislodged, its easy for people without germ theory to confuse infection with poison, but Adrienne Mayor believes that the Scythians deliberately poisoned their arrows (like some people in Central Africa and South America poisoned their arrows). I have heard that some French source accused the English of poisoning their arrows in the Hundred Years' War but I don't know the source.

I'm not sure if the trope of poisoned swords or daggers goes back any further than Shakespeare's Hamlet.

www.bookandsword.com
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Wed 29 Jun, 2022 6:02 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I read something about Orpiment being used to coat arrowheads, but apparently this is also in China and Central Asia...
System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Anthony Clipsom




Location: YORKSHIRE, UK
Joined: 27 Jul 2009

Posts: 218

PostPosted: Wed 29 Jun, 2022 10:17 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
I have heard that some French source accused the English of poisoning their arrows in the Hundred Years' War but I don't know the source.


I read recently in Sir John Smythe's Discourses that rusty arrowheads caused wounds that led to the French believing the English poisoned their arrows, but I don't have the exact quote to hand.

Anthony Clipsom
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Thu 30 Jun, 2022 6:51 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I've also seen something about arrows being dipped in "manure" though only in secondary sources.
System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Sean Manning




Location: Austria
Joined: 23 Mar 2008

Posts: 732

PostPosted: Thu 30 Jun, 2022 7:02 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The TV Tropes page for Poisoned Weapons does not even have stories about poisoned melee weapons before some versions of Tristan and Iseult where Sir Morholt supposedly stabs Tristan with a poisoned spear. The trope of the poisoned dagger seems to have really taken off in the 20th century after first aid and antibiotics and desk jobs made plain old stabbing seem less terrible.

I don't know of any way of proving that a useful idiot was never given a basilard and told "this was cursed by a Saracen and sprinkled with the venom of an Indian manticore! It will kill the podestà for sure and then run out the left door where a horse will be waiting for you"* but I think poisoned swords, spears, and daggers are basically a fictional trope inspired by stories of poisoned arrows.

* The horse was a squad of crossbowmen with their bows spanned, so the new podestà was not able to put the assassin to the question and uncover who was behind this fiendish plot - ed.

www.bookandsword.com
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Thu 30 Jun, 2022 10:01 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Well part of the issue is that poison does not kill quickly, especially most poisons available in say, 1400.

So using poison on a blade in a standup fight may not make much sense. It's just likely to get you in trouble if detected.

However arsenic is one of those poisons that is fairly hard to detect. It could be made colorless and tasteless (this was known going back to the Roman Empire if not before). It's a metal which could even be incorporated into things. It was apparently used to make 'shot' in the 17th Century.

If you wanted to say, stab the podesta in a crowd, and help ensure that he wouldn't recover no matter how good the physician, coating a blade in orpiment powder or something similar (a substance widely available in Italy from the early 14th C from what I understand, and a substance with well known noxious properties) seems like it might not be a bad idea.

Same with say, coating the dart of a balestrino that you could shoot someone walking by a narrow opening in a window in some alley in Genoa.

And on a similar note, I think they knew enough about medicine that it might occur to people to dip a blade in excrement or some other filth before stabbing someone.

But I don't know of any examples of this except possibly in siege warfare, with arrowheads as you say. Maybe for assassinations it was sill just easier and more reliable to lace food, makeup, clothing, drinks, etc. and have them ingest the poison.

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Gregg Sobocinski




Location: Michigan
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Likes: 5 pages
Reading list: 12 books

Posts: 169

PostPosted: Thu 30 Jun, 2022 10:26 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I can not see where poisoning anything except arrows would be practical. If a sword or dagger, how would you carry it? You would need to clean it before putting it back into the sheath, which puts yourself into danger. Keeping edged weapons dry and sharp is a major job of soldiering, isn’t it? As for hafted weapons, I wouldn’t want to march with a neighbor whose naked blade is poisoned.

As others have said, topical poisons are terribly ineffective. Infection is more effective than chemicals.
View user's profile Send private message
Anthony Clipsom




Location: YORKSHIRE, UK
Joined: 27 Jul 2009

Posts: 218

PostPosted: Thu 30 Jun, 2022 10:32 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Here is the quote from John Smythe's Certain Discourses mentioned above

further report and say, that they [the French] did thinke that the English Archers did vse to poyson their arrowe heads;* because that of great numbers of the French Nation that many times had been wounded or hurt with arrowes, verie fewe had escaped with their liues; by reason that their wounds did so impostume, that they could not be cu∣red. In which their cōceipts they did greatlie erre; be∣cause in troth those impostumations proceeded of no∣thing els but of the verie rust of the arrowe heads that remained ranckling within their wounds; and there∣fore by the common experience of our auncient Ene∣mies, (that we haue so often vanquished) not onlie the great, but also the small wounds of our arrowes haue been alwaies found to bee more daungerous and hard to be cured, than the fire of anie shot vnpoysoned.

Anthony Clipsom
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jul, 2022 3:51 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gregg Sobocinski wrote:
I can not see where poisoning anything except arrows would be practical. If a sword or dagger, how would you carry it? You would need to clean it before putting it back into the sheath, which puts yourself into danger. Keeping edged weapons dry and sharp is a major job of soldiering, isn’t it? As for hafted weapons, I wouldn’t want to march with a neighbor whose naked blade is poisoned.

As others have said, topical poisons are terribly ineffective. Infection is more effective than chemicals.


Well, it may seem implausible, and yet we know for a fact that poison weapons were used (both chemical and biological).

In Southeast Asia poisoned darts were used with their light and repeating crossbows right up into the 20th Century. In the Philippines they used to put poison on their Kampilan swords, in fact there is a little 'spur' affixed to the sword just for that purpose. And apparently the Chinese did put oripment on arrowheads. There are also several detailed descriptions of the Mongls using either chemical or biological agents or both in various methods during battles and sieges in Europe and Central Asia.

Because chemical poison doesn't kill quickly, to me the most likely military context for this is siege warfare. We certainly know that they used biological and chemical / pyrotechnic weapons during sieges, we know that in Antiquity they used chemical weapons in siege warfare, specifically down in the tunnels.

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Fri 01 Jul, 2022 5:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Anthony Clipsom wrote:
Here is the quote from John Smythe's Certain Discourses mentioned above

further report and say, that they [the French] did thinke that the English Archers did vse to poyson their arrowe heads;* because that of great numbers of the French Nation that many times had been wounded or hurt with arrowes, verie fewe had escaped with their liues; by reason that their wounds did so impostume, that they could not be cu∣red. In which their cōceipts they did greatlie erre; be∣cause in troth those impostumations proceeded of no∣thing els but of the verie rust of the arrowe heads that remained ranckling within their wounds; and there∣fore by the common experience of our auncient Ene∣mies, (that we haue so often vanquished) not onlie the great, but also the small wounds of our arrowes haue been alwaies found to bee more daungerous and hard to be cured, than the fire of anie shot vnpoysoned.


Very interesting, and reminds me of one of the first West European descriptions of firearms from 1262, when King Alfonso X of Castile was besieging the Moorish stronghold of Niebla in what is now Spain. The Moors used the new “boom stick” weapon effectively, to the dismay of the Castillians:

“..The Arabs threw many (iron) balls launched with thunder, the Christians were very afraid of, as any member of the body hit was severed as if with a knife; and the wounded man died afterwards, because no surgery could heal him, in part because the balls were hot as fire, and apart of that, because the powders used were of such nature that any ulcer done meant the death of the injured man...
.. and he was hit with a ball of the thunder in the arm, and was cut off, and died next day: and the same happened to all of those injured by the thunder. And even now the story is being told amongst the host…”

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,231

PostPosted: Tue 05 Jul, 2022 7:29 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The weight of the evidence indicates that poisoning arrows & darts was militarily effective, even though I'm not aware of any records of the practice from medieval Europe. For example, this late-Ming manual by Cheng Zong You goes into detail about how to apply poison to bolts for weak crossbow that need it to be sufficiently dangerous. (The text specifies that these crossbows are less powerful than a 50lb composite bow with a modest draw length.) The text asserts that "[w]hen the arrow hits a person, he will die within a few steps." That's probably an exaggeration, but this poison may actually have acted rather fast. Cheng included a way to test the poison, both on a chicken & on the producer's own body. A chicken stabbed in the wing with a small amount of the poison was supposed to turn its head back to attend the wing 2-3 times before dying for the poison to be fast enough. The human test was with a needle to thigh, & feeling how the pain spreads in the body.

In the 15th & 16th centuries, if not earlier, Europeans sometimes fought against foes who employed poisoned arrows & other poisoned projectiles. Accounts indicate these poisoned weapons killed & terrified Europeans. See A Cultural History of the Atlantic World, 1250-1820 by John K. Thornton. Nuno Tristão's fourth voyage in the middle of the 15th century, for instance, met defeat south of Cape Vert when opponents wielding poisoned arrows killed him & most of his crew. In the late 1520s in what's now known as Colombia, Spanish forces repeatedly had trouble with Indigenous groups who used poisoned arrows. Etc.

Militarily effective projectile poison seems to have required available plants or other poison sources, a production system, & a practice of use. These elements apparently did not come together in Europe.

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
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Fri 08 Jul, 2022 5:55 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

So I did a little more digging on this, and apparently the Scythians used poison arrows routinely, according to many Greek sources, and the Greeks themselves made note of the formula. They called it 'Scythicon'

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-professions/snake-venom

Quote from the article:

Complex recipes for envenomed arrows are recorded in Greek and Latin texts. One of the most dreaded arrow drugs was concocted by the Scythians, who combined snake venom and bacteriological agents from rotting dung, human blood, and putrefying viper carcasses bloated with feces. Even in the case of a superficial arrow wound, the toxins would begin taking effect within an hour. Envenomation accompanied by shock, necrosis, and suppuration of the wound would be followed by gangrene and tetanus and an agonizing death.


Then the same article notes

According to the Greek and Roman writers, archers who steeped their arrows in serpents’ venom included the Gauls, the Dacians and Dalmatians (of the Balkans), the Sarmatians of Persia (now Iran), the Getae of Thrace, Slavs, Armenians, Parthians between the Indus and Euphrates, Indians, North Africans, and the Scythian nomads of the Central Asian steppes. According to the ancient Greek geographer Strabo, the arrow poison concocted by the Soanes of the Caucasus was so noxious that its mere odor was injurious. Strabo also reported that people of what is now Kenya dipped their arrows ‘in the gall of serpents’, while the Roman historian Silius Italicus described the snake venom arrows used by the archers of Libya, Morocco, Egypt, and Sudan. Ancient Chinese sources show that arrow poisons were also in use in China at early dates. In the Americas, Native Americans used snake, frog, and plant poisons on projectiles for hunting and warfare.

There is an interesting looking book coming out about this. I listened to one of this lady's lectures on Youtube, she knows her stuff.

https://www.amazon.com/Greek-Poison-Arrows-Scorpion-Bombs/dp/0691211086/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=Adrienne+Mayor&link_code=qs&qid=1657337144&sourceid=Mozilla-search&sr=8-3

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Ryan S.




Location: Germany
Joined: 04 May 2012

Posts: 187

PostPosted: Sun 10 Jul, 2022 1:00 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It seems to be a pattern of sources attributing the use of poison arrows to other cultures.

I have always been sceptical of poisoned weapons, because I wondered how it would stay on the weapon. The main way of using poison seems to be dipping the arrowhead in a liquid. The poison, that doesn't drip off before the arrow is shot, must then stay on the arrow while it flies and then not be wiped off by the armour and clothes. The remaining portion of the poison must then be strong enough to disable the target before the battle is over. Of course, the more effective an unpoisoned weapon is, the less advantage there is to adding poison.
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Sun 10 Jul, 2022 5:48 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Ryan S. wrote:
It seems to be a pattern of sources attributing the use of poison arrows to other cultures.

I have always been sceptical of poisoned weapons, because I wondered how it would stay on the weapon. The main way of using poison seems to be dipping the arrowhead in a liquid. The poison, that doesn't drip off before the arrow is shot, must then stay on the arrow while it flies and then not be wiped off by the armour and clothes. The remaining portion of the poison must then be strong enough to disable the target before the battle is over. Of course, the more effective an unpoisoned weapon is, the less advantage there is to adding poison.


Well, maybe there is a pattern of attributing the origin of the poisoned arrows to other cultures, which implies there is still possibly some cultural opprobrium associated with the practice, but as the article (and others) note, the method for making the poison was published in Latin and Greek and the Romans themselves apparently acknowledged using it. They certainly didn't shy away from any ruthless expedients in warfare.

Regarding the efficacy of the poison, we know that poison was used on arrow heads (and crossbow darts) in China and SE Asia in exactly this manner right up to the 20th Century. We know that poison is still in wide use for hunting in South America to this day. No doubt it's difficult and risky to handle, but some people deem the results worth the effort / risk.

As for your specific objections, I don't think poison actually has to be in a liquid, a paste or a powder will also work. Nor does it have to be 100% effective every time for it to have a significant effect in aggregate. And no, I don't think it has to disable the target before the battle is over. Wars don't consist of a single battle. I believe the intent is to increase the attrition effect. A bow can be very effective, but used en-masse, most of the injuries are likely to be non-fatal. Particularly if the opposing army is wearing armor. Injuries to leg and arm would typically be recoverable in many cases. Same thing for injuries to horses.

But if the wound is poisoned, the rate of recovery is much reduced, and therefore the consequences of the battle far more dire. If, as the article suggests, the poison was effective within hours of a wound, or even days, the effects could be quite telling in a war as the attrition rate would increase swiftly and dramatically. I think this is rather obvious. There would also very likely be a knock-on effect on morale.

Even if some people got lucky and the poison on the arrowhead was rubbed off by their clothing, enough wouldn't be so that the effect would still be substantial. This also brings to mind the notion of Arabs and Persians wearing silk garments in battle so that the arrowhead was less likely to pierce (and contact) the skin.


At this point I don't think there is any doubt that poisoned arrows, and probably other weapons, were in wide use in the Classical World and into the Migration Era. The question for me at this point is, when exactly did it fall out of use, if it ever really did, and why.

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Sean Manning




Location: Austria
Joined: 23 Mar 2008

Posts: 732

PostPosted: Sun 10 Jul, 2022 7:08 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

And as I said, there are lots of stories about poisoned arrows, but I'm not sure that the trope of poisoned swords and daggers is older than Shakespeare's Hamlet.
www.bookandsword.com
View user's profile Send private message
Graham Shearlaw





Joined: 24 Oct 2011
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 130

PostPosted: Sun 10 Jul, 2022 8:15 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Poisoned weapons tend to be of limited use, many poisons are useless for hunting as the toxins might be carried over, and in battle there not strong enough to make a fast difference.
A wound that makes a casualty is as good as a fatality to the aggressor.

A major limit is that poisons are not easy to handle, one miss hap with a poisoned point or edge and you end up like Philoctetes suffering from a festering wound for years.

A large amount of the poisons power was as a deterrent, "Don't think about attacking us or we'll use chemical weapons/poisoned arrows."
That's why there's a lot of tales of there nasty effects in gory details, to spread fear of them far and wide.
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Sun 10 Jul, 2022 2:36 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Graham Shearlaw wrote:
Poisoned weapons tend to be of limited use, many poisons are useless for hunting as the toxins might be carried over, and in battle there not strong enough to make a fast difference.


2,000 + years of their use in China and elsewhere suggests that it did make a difference.

Quote:

A wound that makes a casualty is as good as a fatality to the aggressor.


Depends what you mean by "makes a casualty". we know from various period literary sources (ranging from personal letters to formal records), that wounds of a fairly trivial nature were very common in medieval warfare. Nor does the modern trope that (in the middle ages) any kind of open wound down to a paper cut automatically lead to death by infection hold up to scrutiny.

If you caused a maiming or incapacitating wound, such as you easily can by striking someone on the extremities with a modern assault rifle, then you have indeed made a "casualty" which is a problem for the enemy. Arrows and javelins and swords obviously cause maiming wounds as well. But wounds which had little to no impact on fighting ability do not seem to be unusual in the least either in literary sources or forensic / archeological ones. To the contrary.

An otherwise trivial wound like that caused by a poison tipped arrow coated in specially processed snake venom however, would definitely increase the ratio from 'wounds' to 'casualties'

Quote:

A major limit is that poisons are not easy to handle, one miss hap with a poisoned point or edge and you end up like Philoctetes suffering from a festering wound for years.


There are certainly risks, but there are many risks associated with all kinds of weapons used in the medieval period until today. Early firearms were extremely dangerous to use and to prep. Molten glass being dumped over the side of a wall in a siege is extremely risk. Loading a basket of snakes into a torsion powered siege weapon (or the severed heads of plague victims) is also extremely hazardous. So was climbing a siege ladder. But we sure know it was done.

Quote:

A large amount of the poisons power was as a deterrent, "Don't think about attacking us or we'll use chemical weapons/poisoned arrows."
That's why there's a lot of tales of there nasty effects in gory details, to spread fear of them far and wide.


Poison is certainly a terror weapon. For sure the Mongols used it that way, and directly against civilians.

In WWI, poison gas weapons were used, often in a very hazardous manner with slipshod safety gear, repeatedly for the better part of three years, causing an estimated 1.3 million casualties and 100,000 deaths. Chemical weapons as we call them now did turn out to be effective, in spite all the hazards, though many nations today have decided to forgo their use. Even today we can't say that they are completely gone from the battlefield as they seem to return from time to time.

But there did eventually develop enough of a cultural prohibition against their use that it has certainly diminished. Maybe something like that happened with poison weapons by the medieval period. But maybe it's use did continue here and there in some fashion, much as we see Chlorine and Sarin and so on showing up on modern battlefields. That's what I'm interested in finding out at this point.

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,383

PostPosted: Sun 10 Jul, 2022 6:16 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Sean Manning wrote:
And as I said, there are lots of stories about poisoned arrows, but I'm not sure that the trope of poisoned swords and daggers is older than Shakespeare's Hamlet.


One thing that would be interesting to look into is if there were any laws prohibiting the use of poisoned weapons specifically in medieval Europe, I'd say especially in Italy or Byzantium. I know there was a long and ongoing rash of poisonings in many Italian towns, notably Rome.

System D'Armes HEMA in New Orleans

Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum

Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Poisoned weapon use in medieval Europe
Page 1 of 5 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  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 2003-2022 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum