Typical indo-persian looks like that.
If you take these rings that have a nice overlap and smooth shape would that differ much from this "russian" bechter rings?
Here is a detail of another "mess". Bechter with bikaneer text.
Attachment: 91.42 KB
I agree.
Typical indo-persian looks like that.
If you take these rings that have a nice overlap and smooth shape would that differ much from this "russian" bechter rings?
Here is a detail of another "mess". Bechter with bikaneer text.
Attachment: 91.42 KB
Typical indo-persian looks like that.
If you take these rings that have a nice overlap and smooth shape would that differ much from this "russian" bechter rings?
Here is a detail of another "mess". Bechter with bikaneer text.
Attachment: 91.42 KB| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| I agree.
Typical indo-persian looks like that. If you take these rings that have a nice overlap and smooth shape would that differ much from this "russian" bechter rings? Here is a detail of another "mess". Bechter with bikaneer text. |
Actually from what I have seen only Indian riveted mail looks like that, Ottoman and Persian riveted mail have their own individual look.
As for the supposedly Russian mail with Indian armory markings, somehow mail from other countries ended up in India, you have to examine the links, it is originally Russian then it does not matter what markings were put on it. Also for many years there were not as many detailed images available to study so people have mistaken one type of mail for another.
Here is an example of Indian riveted mail, 16th to 17th c (Lt), compared to Ottoman riveted mail, 15th to 16th c (Rt). Both types use alternating solid links and round riveted links but the differences are quite noticable.
[ Linked Image ]
A further complication is that mail is often assembled, repaired, and reworked with different style rings. Sometimes different styles of mail are used to form the bulk of the mail than used to join plates. Some mail seems to have been patched together from scraps. Here are two examples in the Livrustkammaren:
http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...detailView
[ Linked Image ]
http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...y&sp=2
And the big b&W image:
http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...t&sp=0
[ Linked Image ]
http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...detailView
[ Linked Image ]
http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...y&sp=2
And the big b&W image:
http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...t&sp=0
[ Linked Image ]
Yes In fact you are absolutely right Eric.
I guess it was most Ottoman feature to have hexa solid rings.
Here is one smaller piece of mail that looks having the same hexa form but cant really find out the riveting.
The bigger rings here in Ottoman Kolzak are very much the same as you posted..
This kolzak seem to have its original form of mail attached to it.
One more slice of mail I suppose is Indian but very small rings similar in size like european single sleeves.
Mart I can see that. Its very obvious to restore and keep the pieces in a working condition. Pictures from St Irene arsenal in 1920's are quite astonishing.
Attachment: 325.19 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 448.41 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 438.08 KB
[ Download ]
I guess it was most Ottoman feature to have hexa solid rings.
Here is one smaller piece of mail that looks having the same hexa form but cant really find out the riveting.
The bigger rings here in Ottoman Kolzak are very much the same as you posted..
This kolzak seem to have its original form of mail attached to it.
One more slice of mail I suppose is Indian but very small rings similar in size like european single sleeves.
Mart I can see that. Its very obvious to restore and keep the pieces in a working condition. Pictures from St Irene arsenal in 1920's are quite astonishing.
Attachment: 325.19 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 448.41 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 438.08 KB[ Download ]
Oh, full picture of kolzak. Still working with these image sizes...
Sorry.
Attachment: 320.39 KB
[ Download ]
Sorry.
Attachment: 320.39 KB[ Download ]
| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| I agree.
Typical indo-persian looks like that. If you take these rings that have a nice overlap and smooth shape would that differ much from this "russian" bechter rings? Here is a detail of another "mess". Bechter with bikaneer text. |
Peter, take a look at the characteristics of your example next to Indian and Ottoman mail, any similarities?
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/d5/cc/1a/d5cc1ac9bd542570846ed2d405a7c16a.jpg
[ Linked Image ]
Yes they are identical in most way. Bechter rings identical to your indian and kolzak is typical ottoman you have pictured.
Smaller mail garment is also ottoman. Tiny mail seems to have copper rivets.
r. Peter
Smaller mail garment is also ottoman. Tiny mail seems to have copper rivets.
r. Peter
| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| Yes they are identical in most way. Bechter rings identical to your indian |
Peter, im not seeing that at all, the Indian solid links are flat sided, the links from your example are in my estimation completely different, they do not look like the other Indian riveted mail I have seen, maybe it is Russian or Eastern European after all. I have added some arrows to show the indian solid links.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/96/25/3a/96253ad482d2c952d8407591a4e84c5f.jpg
[ Linked Image ]
| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| Yes In fact you are absolutely right Eric.
I guess it was most Ottoman feature to have hexa solid rings. Here is one smaller piece of mail that looks having the same hexa form but cant really find out the riveting. |
The rivets are there but they have been worn and bernished over time, you see this same thing on European mail. It looks like ottoman mail.
[ Linked Image ]
| Quote: |
| The bigger rings here in Ottoman Kolzak are very much the same as you posted. This kolzak seem to have its original form of mail attached to it. |
I think your right.
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
| Quote: |
| One more slice of mail I suppose is Indian but very small rings similar in size like european single sleeves. |
Looks like Indian mail to me, the solid links have flat sides. Indian mail can be quite small.
[ Linked Image ]
Eric,
Why do you think Indian solid rings have this faceted appearance? We know that some (if not all) theta-links were forge welded. I wonder if these aren't made from a band which is welded closed, much like the construction of a wedding ring. The section often seems more vertically oriented on these faceted Indian rings.
Why do you think Indian solid rings have this faceted appearance? We know that some (if not all) theta-links were forge welded. I wonder if these aren't made from a band which is welded closed, much like the construction of a wedding ring. The section often seems more vertically oriented on these faceted Indian rings.
| Mart Shearer wrote: |
| Eric,
Why do you think Indian solid rings have this faceted appearance? We know that some (if not all) theta-links were forge welded. I wonder if these aren't made from a band which is welded closed, much like the construction of a wedding ring. The section often seems more vertically oriented on these faceted Indian rings. |
I agree that the Indian solid links seem to have been made with a strip of metal that was welded into form, the two logical reasons would be either it was an easier production method or for strength.
Here is a close up view which seems to show the delamination of some Indian solid links??? It looks like the joint had an angle lap and not just butted.
[ Linked Image ]
Last edited by Eric S on Tue 05 May, 2015 4:21 pm; edited 1 time in total
Yes Eric here we disagree in one piece of separate mail made from solid and riveted links. I was first thinking this is european early piece of mail but then again solid rings look to be somewhat hexa in form. This could happen by the wear also. So it might be European after all. But I was not thinking it is Indian. More likely Mamluk or safavid.
Eric I know where the rivets are in worn rings, I just wanted to say that I was not able to determine how the rivets are looking after everything is so soft rounded.
Anyway this is very ineresting for everybody to see and learn about the mail with good pointing.
I have to say you guys are awesome. Let see what more we can find out.
Eric I know where the rivets are in worn rings, I just wanted to say that I was not able to determine how the rivets are looking after everything is so soft rounded.
Anyway this is very ineresting for everybody to see and learn about the mail with good pointing.
I have to say you guys are awesome. Let see what more we can find out.
Eric.
Now i got it. Maybe you are right. Maybe this bechter with bikaneer engraveing is really easten originally.
There is only one strong sided ring in the whole shirt. Are you sure all the indian solid rings were just of that type very strong sided?
Very good point if that is the case.
Now i got it. Maybe you are right. Maybe this bechter with bikaneer engraveing is really easten originally.
There is only one strong sided ring in the whole shirt. Are you sure all the indian solid rings were just of that type very strong sided?
Very good point if that is the case.
| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| Yes Eric here we disagree in one piece of separate mail made from solid and riveted links. I was first thinking this is european early piece of mail but then again solid rings look to be somewhat hexa in form. This could happen by the wear also. So it might be European after all. But I was not thinking it is Indian. More likely Mamluk or safavid.
Eric I know where the rivets are in worn rings, I just wanted to say that I was not able to determine how the rivets are looking after everything is so soft rounded. Anyway this is very ineresting for everybody to see and learn about the mail with good pointing. I have to say you guys are awesome. Let see what more we can find out. |
Peter, the overall look to me says Ottoman, expecially the solid links, can you get a picture of the other side of the same piece, that may be helpful, if there are any rivets showing on the other side I would definately say Ottoman.
[ Linked Image ]
| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| Eric.
Now i got it. Maybe you are right. Maybe this bechter with bikaneer engraveing is really easten originally. There is only one strong sided ring in the whole shirt. Are you sure all the indian solid rings were just of that type very strong sided? Very good point if that is the case. |
Peter, can you get any additional images of the bechter links, when mail is very worn it can be hard to tell exactly what the origin is, I see what looks like some large repair links in the photo of the links you provided.
As for Indian solid links, unfortunately there are just not enough close up images available to say what the majority of Indian solid links are like, I have a few additional images from old Indian armors but I am out of the country for a while and do not have access to my computer, if I can find some more good exabples I will post them, maybe another forum member has some other Indian examples.
In addition there are some different looking Indian solid links that appear the have been made using a swage, the sides are more angular than flat, but just like the other type they are very uniform in shape/size and easily identifiable. All of the Indian riveted mail I have seen close up appears to be rather uniform and well made.
Here's some Indian (Indian, Mughal or Deccani) mail in the Metropolitan's collection, Accession Number: 2000.497:
http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-colle...arch/25368
High resolution images for comparison:
http://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/aa/original/DP159268.jpg
http://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/aa/original/DP159267.jpg
As usual, there are some missing rivets allowing the round-section hole to be seen.
http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-colle...arch/25368
| Quote: |
| The armor is part of a large group of material that comes from the armory of the maharajas of Bikaner in Rajastan, northern India. An inscription inside one of the plates gives the name of Maharaja Anup Singh (reigned 1669–98) and the date samvat 1774 (A.D. 1691). Anup Singh was a general in the armies of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and led a series of campaigns in the Deccan in the 1680s and 1690s, including battles at Golconda in 1687 and Adoni in 1689. The date on the armor indicates that it must have been taken as booty during one of the Deccan campaigns. |
High resolution images for comparison:
http://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/aa/original/DP159268.jpg
http://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/aa/original/DP159267.jpg
As usual, there are some missing rivets allowing the round-section hole to be seen.
Eric. Here is some additional images hope they reveal something. Light was very bad today for taking pictures.
r. Ptr
Attachment: 421.51 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 346.77 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 389.35 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 454.64 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 334.09 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 354.91 KB
[ Download ]
Attachment: 360.73 KB
[ Download ]
r. Ptr
Attachment: 421.51 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 346.77 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 389.35 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 454.64 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 334.09 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 354.91 KB[ Download ]
Attachment: 360.73 KB[ Download ]
| Peter Mustonen wrote: |
| Eric. Here is some additional images hope they reveal something. Light was very bad today for taking pictures.
r. Ptr |
Peter, this is an interesting armor, the outer mail does not have the signs I see as being Indian mail at all, yet the mail connecting the plates looks like it mey be Indian mail. Some better images of both the outer mail and the mail in between the plates would help.
Any comments would be appreciated.
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
[ Linked Image ]
As part of a course to learn how to use the new equipment in my university, I took a few pictures of my cheap indian made hauberk, grinded down and under a microscope.
http://gyazo.com/e3e507b6c1475723882f0a9e36e34e15
The riveted part. Mag. 50x. The rivet seems awfully small for the hole.
http://gyazo.com/35f8ecf89e6373002c285725529be595
Vertical cut of the ring and rivet. MAG 50X.
Sorry for no scale attached. The rings are flat and have 9mm id.
http://gyazo.com/e3e507b6c1475723882f0a9e36e34e15
The riveted part. Mag. 50x. The rivet seems awfully small for the hole.
http://gyazo.com/35f8ecf89e6373002c285725529be595
Vertical cut of the ring and rivet. MAG 50X.
Sorry for no scale attached. The rings are flat and have 9mm id.
Peter, those torso armours look Russian to me.
Page 22 of 27
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou 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 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum