African knights - African armour collection thread

[Jim McDougall]

Some very interesting material being shared and discussed here, and has prompted me to look back into this topic as it has been some time since last involved with it. The notes are from material which prompted my comments earlier, and after reviewing much of it supports most of the observations here in the thread so just wanted to add.

From H.Russell Robinson , "Oriental Armour" (1967):
Re: Sudanese armour during the Mahdiya,

P. 84: "...the better armed emirs wore rounded helmets, with an aventail of riveted mail and a heavy fixed nasal. "
"...over the body they wore a long quilted jibbah either with or without a mail shirt over it".
"...the mail shirts were all made on the same pattern; short sleeves, round neck opening, and long skirt split to the level of the fork at front and back,
all examples of these shirts show very considerable wear and much patching with crude links of wire or split rings of modern European manufacture.
I would suggest these are generally of old Arab make. All of the rings are riveted except in the case of later repairs, and many are so worn with use that they could be broken with the fingers without effort".

P.85:
Re: various materials brought back from the Mahdist campaigns by British forces.
Among the items was one of the helmets for the Khedives bodyguards which was made in Birmingham. This equipment apparently was completed with a mail shirt made of split rings, which when struck by 'Sudanese' bullets the brittle rings shattered and caused appalling wounds. It appears when the Sudanese captured these items they would only keep and use the helmets- preferring their old mail shirts to these 'new' ones so fraught with risk.

Here it is most interesting that although the old mail was severely worn and poorly repaired in many cases, it was still better than this disastrous type which seems to have been produced in England along with the helmets. I would note these English helmets are not like those pictured here in the thread with the arrow nasal and star in disc etc. Those as well as the cuirass are as noted apparently French. The French had been notably present in Khedival Egypt so this is not surprising.

It does seem these type helmets of the 'French' cuirassier type actually predate the c. 1844 date often assigned to them, and are noted in drawings slightly earlier. They are seen in illustrations of Khedival bodyguard cuirassiers in the Crimea in 1854.

Apparently by the 1880s there had been some deviation in degree or perhaps incidental license by an artist, as in the French " Le Drapeau" (July,1882) two members of the Khedives bodyguards are seen wearing mail rather than the cuirass.
Another case in Illustrated London News (1882) there are two Circassian irregulars listed as Khedival bodyguards.

I located the article "Making of Mail at Omdurman" by A.J.Arkell ("Kush" Vol. IV , p83-85, 1956) which was cited by Robinson in noting that apparently in the 1940s, mail was still readily produced in Sudan....however it was noted it was using butted rings only, not the riveted.
Arkell notes that mail from outside Sudan was imported considerably prior to 1885, and that virtually every melik (chief) had from 2 to 3 hundred suits of mail on hand in those times. It was discussed about where this volume of mail was obtained and Sir James Mann thought it had come from Syria or Arabia, however the renowned Lawrence of Arabia had been unable to find evidence to support that claim. Arkell indicates he thinks it came mostly from India.


Returning to Robinson (op.cit. p86) it is noted that in Nigerian regions, two groups are known for their medieval knight character in their warriors, those from Bornu and the Begharmi. In these instances Robinson suggests the mail shirts worn are of considerable quality and appear of Arab make. With that he suggests Mamluk possibility of origin.

It would appear that indeed there has remained in Africa, from the Saharan kingdoms of Nigeria to the Sudan, a considerable tradition of mail armour being worn. While in the times of the campaigns the armour extant had been brought in volume for some time, and had often become worn and field repaired, it does seem to have been viably worn in combat.

In later times of course, the traditional use of mail in parade or ceremonial instances seems well known (typically of the butted form), however earlier armour with some antiquity certainly may well have been used in varying instances far into the 20th century.

[Ian]

I was fascinated by the armor shown by LinusLinothorax and reproduced in this thread below. It struck a chord about a race of people in the Sudan who were described in antiquity by the Romans as "headless." This race was said to occupy the area during the Post-Meroitic Period (350–543 CE).

Here is some material from a Polish Museum web site (http://www.muzarp.poznan.pl/en/exhib...d-and-x-group/):

The Post-Meroitic Period and X-Group (350 – 543 AD)

The fall of the Empire
Although the last Meroitic monarch known by name was Yesbokheamani (283 – 300 AD), 30 years later the dead rulers were still buried in the Northern cemetery of Meroe. On the other hand, an inscription of an Ethiopian king Aezana, discovered in the city of Axum and dated to c. 350 AD, reports a war with the Noba people and the conquest of Al-Butana. Probably at that time the kingdom of Meroe no longer existed. Whether the hegemony of Meroe collapsed due to an internal crisis, or whether its fall was partly brought about y raiding nomads from the desert, is a question that cannot be decisively answered…

The nomads build tumuli…
The next two centuries, the so-called Post-Meroitic period, is one of the most mysterious and least recognized periods in the history of the Sudan. Monumental architecture and knowledge of writing disappeared altogether, and in the belt between Sennar and the Fourth Cataract there appear earth burial tumuli of the Tanqasi culture, today the only legible remains of the Noba nomad tribes who arrived at this region from the territories of modern Kordofan. An especially large and richly equipped burial ground was discovered in el-Hobagi.

The Blemmyes – a wild headless race
The Meroitic inhabitants of Lower Nubia encountered arrivals using the Nubian language. These included the Nobatae who in 296 were apparently entrusted by Emperor Diocletian with the defense of the southern Egyptian frontier, and the Blemmyes from Eastern Desert, scornfully described by Pliny as "a wild headless race with eyes and ears rising directly from their shoulders." The latter were particularly devoted to the old Egyptian religion and each year would go on a mass pilgrimage to the sanctuary of Isis on the Island of Philae. The specific civilization that emerged from the fusion of these elements is named the X-Group or Ballana culture.

The nameless kings from Ballana and Qustul
It was in Ballana, and also at nearby Qustul, that the cemeteries of huge tumuli with burials of tribal rulers were found. The dead were equipped with immense splendor – the burial gifts included breathtaking crowns that used the symbolism of ancient Egyptian motifs, and highly precious silver vessels imported from territories of the Roman Empire. The political significance of those nameless kings is highly obscure. Probably we shall never know whether the two Nobatian rulers, Silko and Kharamazeye, mentioned in the inscriptions on the temple walls in Kalabsha, had also been buried in one of the Ballana tumulus graves…

So no less an authority than Pliny described the Blemmyes as "a wild headless race with eyes and ears rising directly from their shoulders," and later artists depicted them as very strange indivudals with their mouths and nose arising in their chest (see drawing below).

As far as I know, there have never been found any skeletal remains of such individuals. However, in the 3rd C the Blemmyes were a belligerent group who fought with everyone in the area, including the Romans, and likely wore their body armor in encounters with other groups. The picture shown by Linus Linothorax indicates a type of body armor that extended from "the eyes to the knees of the wearer." You can see that this is an accurate description by the positioning of the arm holes, which are quite low. Now if the Romans only saw these people in their armor, it would indeed appear that their eyes were at the level of their shoulders, and therefore their mouths and noses must be in their chests. The term Blemmyes comes from the Latin blemmyae meaning "headless" (cf. Greek akephaloi). The picture below shows a 15th C artist's idea what such a person looked like and is taken from a woodcut in Schedel's Nuremberg Chronicle (1493).

Over the years, a number of attempts have been made to explain what people thought they saw in ancient times when they described this headless race. Some have said that their heads were hidden between their shoulders by hoisting those up to an extravagant height. I think we have a simpler and more compelling explanation in the form of the armor they used. From the shape shown in the accompanying picture, it can be seen that the eyes of individuals wearing such armor would have appeared at the level of their shoulders (i.e. the upper level of the armor over their shoulders which was suspended above their actual shoulders to protect the neck and face).

This explanation for the race of Blemmyes does not appear anywhere in the historical literature that I have searched, and appears to be a new observation.

Ian.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Some very interesting material being shared and discussed here, and has prompted me to look back into this topic as it has been some time since last involved with it. The notes are from material which prompted my comments earlier, and after reviewing much of it supports most of the observations here in the thread so just wanted to add.

From H.Russell Robinson , "Oriental Armour" (1967):
Re: Sudanese armour during the Mahdiya,

P. 84: "...the better armed emirs wore rounded helmets, with an aventail of riveted mail and a heavy fixed nasal. "
"...over the body they wore a long quilted jibbah either with or without a mail shirt over it".
"...the mail shirts were all made on the same pattern; short sleeves, round neck opening, and long skirt split to the level of the fork at front and back,
all examples of these shirts show very considerable wear and much patching with crude links of wire or split rings of modern European manufacture.
I would suggest these are generally of old Arab make. All of the rings are riveted except in the case of later repairs, and many are so worn with use that they could be broken with the fingers without effort".

P.85:
Re: various materials brought back from the Mahdist campaigns by British forces.
Among the items was one of the helmets for the Khedives bodyguards which was made in Birmingham. This equipment apparently was completed with a mail shirt made of split rings, which when struck by 'Sudanese' bullets the brittle rings shattered and caused appalling wounds. It appears when the Sudanese captured these items they would only keep and use the helmets- preferring their old mail shirts to these 'new' ones so fraught with risk.

Jim, do to the limitations of this forum I will break up my reply.

On the use of mail armor, Robinsons book is good but he obviously did not know much about riveted mail. Almost all known examples of mail from the Middle East and Indian are made from alternating row of solid links and riveted links, with a few exceptions European riveted mail was the only mail with all riveted links.

The Sudanese did not manufacture riveted mail from what I have read, or they made it in very small amounts, what they made was butted mail. While riveted mail was stronger, the butted Sudanese mail absolutely was used during the fighting in that period and was quite capable of stopping a sword. I am surprised Robinson does not mention this as there are known examples that were captured during the fighting in Sudan during the late 1800s. Of course having the internet and computers makes researching so much easier and accurate than in Robinsons day.

The khedive mail was made from split link key chains, these were first made in England by machines around 1824 so they could not be older than that. Because these were actually key chains supposedly they had a high temper so they would not lose their shape, this explains reports of the links shattering when hit by a bullet. They were used at least until 1883 as there are accounts from the doomed William Hicks expedition of 100 cuirasssiers (horseman in chain mail). Up until the time that the Sudanese captured large amounts of high powered firearms the Egyptians did not have to really worry about being shot by the Sudanese, things changed after that.

Khedive Ismail's Army, John P. Dunn, 2005.

zirkhagi(iron men):Armed with sabres and pistols, these men wore chain-mail armour and metal helmets with nose-guards. While neither was proof against firearms, both offered considerable protection from cut and thrust weapons, like those used by the vast majority of Egypts African enemies. They were an elite formation, and often used both to bolster morale amoung regulars, and impress locals such as when a section was sent for duty in Harar during th early 1880s

From George stone referring to the use of armor by the Sudanese.

In the Sudan armor was used until the battle of Omdurman (1889) proved it to be useless when opposed to modern firearms.

I am posting some images, one is of Sudanese butted mail hauberk from the British Museum and its description. Also a cloth shirt with butted mail sleeves used by the Sudanese and an example of a Khedive hauberk made with split link key chain mail.

This is a horseman's long-sleeved chainmail tunic. It has a long skirt with a slit front and back to allow the wearer to sit on a horse. The scoop neck joins to a vertical slit on the front so it can be pulled over the head. The chainmail consists of butt-joined rings and there is no sign of any organic lining. The mail is in good condition with no dents visible. Chainmail and other armour was maintained so it could be in continuous use for long periods, particularly during the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries.

This chainmail tunic was first worn in around the time the Turkish rulers of Egypt conquered Sudan. It was later reused by the Mahdists, followers of Muhammad Ahmad, who overthrew the Turco-Egyptian administration in 1885 and remained in power until 1898.

[blue lander]

Did "African Knights" wear chain mail gloves? I saw a pair of what looked like chain mail mittens go up for auction awhile ago. The seller said they were from Africa but didn't offer much more information. They looked pretty old. I know I saved a few picture of them, I'll try to dig them up.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by blue lander

Did "African Knights" wear chain mail gloves? I saw a pair of what looked like chain mail mittens go up for auction awhile ago. The seller said they were from Africa but didn't offer much more information. They looked pretty old. I know I saved a few picture of them, I'll try to dig them up.

The Khedival forces wore mail gloves or gauntlets, I have seen a picture of British soldiers in India wearing them as well. These were purchased from the same source as the split link, key chain hauberks in England. England supplied mail for countries that continued to have a need for mail in this latter time period. The gloves were supposed to have had more mail on one hand than the other. I think that was due to one hand being the sword hand and the other for a horses reins.

I have a sketch of a Khedive soldier wearing these gloves and a quote which mentions their use by Khedival forces as well, another quote mentions their use in India.

[Jim McDougall]

Estcrh, thank you so much for this wonderfully detailed and well explained response to my entries regarding excerpts from some of the well known published material concerning the Sudanese mail armour.

You clearly have remarkable knowledge and experience in these topics on the armour, and it is great to have this kind of insight into this rather esoteric topic. As can be seen by some of the material I entered, much of the generally held conceptions concerning these North African armours are quite misperceived and insufficiently represented.

I very much like that while you have noted these deficiencies with the Robinson material you avoided diminishing the author by your respectful reference to the advantages todays researchers have. Also, in rebuttal to my entries you have avoided making things 'personal' and have focused on soundly supporting your perspective and corrected the material noted.

What is of key importance here is that with the corpus of material and discussion here on this topic (again I thank Linus for opening this thread) that you guys have assembled, you have created a very informative archived block of material . This is an excellent status quo for those who will be studying these armours in the future here, and I know I have certainly learned a great deal on them.

Thank you both again, very nicely done!

All very best regards,
Jim

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I would note these English helmets are not like those pictured here in the thread with the arrow nasal and star in disc etc. Those as well as the cuirass are as noted apparently French. The French had been notably present in Khedival Egypt so this is not surprising.

It does seem these type helmets of the 'French' cuirassier type actually predate the c. 1844 date often assigned to them, and are noted in drawings slightly earlier. They are seen in illustrations of Khedival bodyguard cuirassiers in the Crimea in 1854.

Apparently by the 1880s there had been some deviation in degree or perhaps incidental license by an artist, as in the French " Le Drapeau" (July,1882) two members of the Khedives bodyguards are seen wearing mail rather than the cuirass.
Another case in Illustrated London News (1882) there are two Circassian irregulars listed as Khedival bodyguards.

Jim, there are still some unanswered mysteries concerning the use of armor in Khedival Egypt.

From what I can glean from mutiple conflicting sources, mail hauberks and steel French helmets with a cresent on top and a sliding nasel were used from sometime after 1824 to the late 1830s or 1840. It is unclear if the hauberks were produced using the split link key chain mail from England as were the later made mail hauberks but were else would they have purchased brand new matching mail armor at that time. Since the split link key chain was first made by machine in 1924 we can assume that the first Khedival mail hauberks were made sometime after 1824.

Sometime around the late 1830s to 1840 steel French cuirass were introduced, they were paired with a helmet that was either the same or very similar to the earlier steel French helmets with the cresent on top and the sliding nasel.

The mail hauberk was not retired, there is at least one instance reported of Khedival troops (Nubians) being seen parading in mail hauberks around 1854.

I have no firm information on when the steel French cuirass and steel French helmet with the cresent on top and the sliding nasel was last used. I have not seen any reports that they were used during the Sudanese war, but they are said to have been used during the Crimean war (1855 to 1856).

Sometime around 1880, several hundred (600 to 800) split link key chain mail hauberks and steel bowl shaped helmets with split link key chain mail neck guards and sliding nasel and mail gauntlets were ordered from England, some sources say that at least part of the order came from Wilkinson Sword. These armors were said to have been used by some Khedival troops during the doomed Hicks expedition, one report says that one hundred mounted troops wearing these mail hauberks were with the Hicks expedition.

There are apparently a few other types of armor used in Khedival Egypt, one print shows a very French looking helmet and steel cuirass being worn by two Egyptian mounted troops, these is one photo showing a few similar armors hanging on the wall of an Egyptian museum.

One other strange looking steel bowl helmet with no sliding nasel has turned up as well, there are a couple of photos of it.

I have posted a few photos, due to the forums lack of inline image attachments they will probably not be in order, you will have to figure them out.

I have put three figures together showing the stages of Khedival armor, on the left is the older mail hauberk with the French helmet, in the middle is the French helmet with the French cuirass, on the right is the later made English helmet and mail hauberk. Also shown is a photo of the unusual brass helmet and cuirass and a detail from the print showing similar armor. Two photos of the unusual bowl shaped helmet.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Jim, there are still some unanswered mysteries concerning the use of armor in Khedival Egypt.

From what I can glean from mutiple conflicting sources, mail hauberks and steel French helmets with a cresent on top and a sliding nasel were used from sometime after 1824 to the late 1830s or 1840. It is unclear if the hauberks were produced using the split link key chain mail from England as were the later made mail hauberks but were else would they have purchased brand new matching mail armor at that time. Since the split link key chain was first made by machine in 1924 we can assume that the first Khedival mail hauberks were made sometime after 1824.

Sometime around the late 1830s to 1840 steel French cuirass were introduced, they were paired with a helmet that was either the same or very similar to the earlier steel French helmets with the cresent on top and the sliding nasel.

The mail hauberk was not retired, there is at least one instance reported of Khedival troops (Nubians) being seen parading in mail hauberks around 1854.

I have no firm information on when the steel French cuirass and steel French helmet with the cresent on top and the sliding nasel was last used. I have not seen any reports that they were used during the Sudanese war, but they are said to have been used during the Crimean war (1855 to 1856).

Sometime around 1880, several hundred (600 to 800) split link key chain mail hauberks and steel bowl shaped helmets with split link key chain mail neck guards and sliding nasel and mail gauntlets were ordered from England, some sources say that at least part of the order came from Wilkinson Sword. These armors were said to have been used by some Khedival troops during the doomed Hicks expedition, one report says that one hundred mounted troops wearing these mail hauberks were with the Hicks expedition.

There are apparently a few other types of armor used in Khedival Egypt, one print shows a very French looking helmet and steel cuirass being worn by two Egyptian mounted troops, these is one photo showing a few similar armors hanging on the wall of an Egyptian museum.

One other strange looking steel bowl helmet with no sliding nasel has turned up as well, there are a couple of photos of it.

I have posted a few photos, due to the forums lack of inline image attachments they will probably not be in order, you will have to figure them out.

I have put three figures together showing the stages of Khedival armor, on the left is the older mail hauberk with the French helmet, in the middle is the French helmet with the French cuirass, on the right is the later made English helmet and mail hauberk. Also shown is a photo of the unusual brass helmet and cuirass and a detail from the print showing similar armor. Two photos of the unusual bowl shaped helmet.

Taking the question of English produced armour...It appears so...

From Wikipedia I Quote" During the late 19th and early 20th century mail was used as a material for bulletproof vests, most notably by the Wilkinson Sword Company. Results were unsatisfactory; Wilkinson mail worn by the Khedive of Egypt's regiment of "Iron Men" was manufactured from split rings which proved to be too brittle, and the rings would fragment when struck by bullets and aggravate the damage. The riveted mail armour worn by the opposing Sudanese Madhists did not have the same problem but also proved to be relatively useless against the firearms of British forces at the battle of Omdurman. During World War I Wilkinson Sword transitioned from mail to a lamellar design which was the precursor to the flak jacket.Unquote.

In effect this is what the Hicks Iron Men were equipped with and may be viewed at http://www.ottoman-uniforms.com/egyp...pedition-1883/ from which I have extracted the following ~Quote.
Hicks Expedition (1883): Khedive's Zirkhagi - the "Iron Men" or Cuirassiers
Pre-WW1 Wilkinson's chainmail vest.
1856-1882 Mounted Palace Guard.

Below - This 1882 illustration, shows a helmet used by the Khedive's Zirkhagi: Iron Men (Cuirassiers) much like the UK made ones :
Deeply-domed helmets (similar to one on display in the National Army Museum, UK pictured below) With separately-applied brow plate;
Adjustable nasal.
Only the small spike ball-finial is missing.

​Khedive's Zirkhagi, the "Iron Men" or Cuirassiers (they were now part of the Khedival Guard). Armed with sabres and pistols, these wore chain-mail armour and metal helmets with nose-guards” .

An illustration from The Graphic (c.1883) ‘Egyptian Cuirassier’. This particular illustration was extracted from a larger grouping of 1883 Hick's Expedition soldiers, seen in The Graphic (24 November, 1883): 516.
This 1883 illustration, shows three key parts to the "Iron Men" equipment:
Helmet much like the UK made ones.

Wilkinson Sword Company coat of mail .
In particular, his right rein-hand is protected by a mail gauntlet - 1860 Wilkinson Sword Co. "Gauntlets").
The right rein-hand gauntlet is completely covered in mail.
Whereas, the left (sword) hand gauntlet is only partially covered in mail, leaving the leather hand portion, which would be protected by the basket-hilt of his sword - which is a standard French Army heavy cavalry sword, dating from the Napoleonic period, as these were sold in large quantities to the Egyptian and Turkish Armies.
----------------------------------
According to 'Khedive Ismail's Army', by John P. Dunn (2013) - “One squadron maintained a different organisation.

(a) 1860 Wilkinson Sword Co. "Coats of Steel Chainmail".
These were the 'Split link mail hauberk', made in England for export.
These mail shirts used by the forces of the Khedive of Egypt in the 1800s until they were replaced with a French made steel cuirass around 1840.
In the 1880s, the Khedive Tewfik ordered from a Birmingham firm 600 hauberks made of split rings for the Egyptian army under Colonel Hicks, and are said to have 'proved worse than useless'.

(b) 1860 Wilkinson Sword Co. "Gauntlets".
As has been observed in the illustration from The Graphic (c.1883) ‘Egyptian Cuirassier’ (above), the Wilkinson Sword Company's gauntlets were designed as a distinctly left, and right handed pairs:
The right rein-hand gauntlet is completely covered in mail.
Whereas, the left (sword) hand gauntlet is only partially covered in mail, leaving the leather hand portion, which would be protected by the basket-hilt of his sword - which is a standard French Army heavy cavalry sword, dating from the Napoleonic period, as these were sold in large quantities to the Egyptian and Turkish Armies.

(c) "Iron Men" helmet (Wilkinson's Sword-Proof Helmet).
Birmingham, UK Helmets Supplied to the Khedive of Egypt’s Regiment of Iron Men. In 'Oriental Armour', by H. Russell Robinson (1967), it is stated:
“now in the Tower Collection (which would now be the ‘Royal Armouries’) – the helmet shown with which is one of many made in Birmingham for the Khedive of Egypt’s regiment of Iron Men."

Information from Auctions Imperial (2012), indicates that deeply-domed helmets (similar to one on display in the National Army Museum, UK pictured below), from the Sudan surmounted by a spike ball- finial, with separately-applied brow plate and adjustable nasal guard. And including a camail woven of heavy split rings. The description of this helmet included the note:

"Helmets of this type were made in Birmingham, originally for the bodyguard of the Khedive of Egypt, known as the "Iron Men" (Auctions Imperial, 2012).

-------------------------------------------
This helmet (now in the National Army Museum), was once part of the Tower Collection; and the original commentary was: “now in the Tower Collection – the helmet shown with which is one of many made in Birmingham for the Khedive of Egypt’s regiment of ‘Iron Men’. The equipment was completed with a mail shirt made of split rings-and when the mail was struck by Sudanese bullets the brittle rings shattered and caused appalling wounds. The Sudanese, it would appear, only used the helmets they captured from the Egyptians, preferring the old shirts they had to the new ones fraught with so much risk.”

It also notes that in their original form, these Sudanese helmets with their long chainmail neck curtains were “sewn to a thickly quilted lining which extends to the shoulders, across the lower face, and then down to form a cuirass which laces up under the left arm.”

Finally, it appears that Wilkinson Sword Co. catalogues, from the 1860's were selling, "coats of steel chainmail, gauntlets and sword-proof helmets." Unquote.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Taking the question of English produced armour...It appears so...

From Wikipedia I Quote"............................................ .................................................. .....

Finally, it appears that Wilkinson Sword Co. catalogues, from the 1860's were selling, "coats of steel chainmail, gauntlets and sword-proof helmets." Unquote.

Ibrahiim, there is a difference between what people write and being able to prove it. The Wikipedia information is completely useless, check the citations and see if you can follow them to a verifiable source, I can not. As for the Wilkinson catelog from the 1860s, do you have a link to it? The only catelog from Wilkinson that I am aware of that describes what we are looking for is a 1851 exhibition catelog were they do describe mail hauberks and gauntlets, but they only mention their use in India, nothing about Egypt, no mention of split links either. It also mentions bridles, you can not control your horse if the bridle is cut. Ottoman-uniforms does not suppy any real proof in the way of verifiable sources that I can fins showing Wilkinson was involved in making either the hauberk or the helmets.

The book that mentions Wilkinson swords involvement in mail hauberk production has been misquoted, in this book "Khartoum campaign, 1898: or the re-conquest of the Soudan By Bennet Burleigh" 1899, the writer says that it is the helmets that were made by Wilkinson, not the mail hauberks. Please carefully read the quote from the book that I have provided below.
"Coats of chain-mail old and new, and steel helmets. Most of the latter are quite modern, being part of the 600 supplied by a London firm of sword makers-Wklkinson & Co. Pall Mall." Notice it reads latter, which would refer to the helmets I believe since the hauberks are mentioned before the the helmets.

All of the mentions in later books and web sites etc seem to be using the quote from this book to back up their claims that Wilkinson had anything to do with the mail hauberls purchased in England for the Khedives forces. If you or anyone else has any additional proof I would be more than happy to learn something new.

Below I have provided the quote directly from the 1851 Wilkinson catelog and the book I mention and a photo of what I believe to be one of the later made 1880s split link key chain mail hauberks next to a drawing of Khedive soldiers, 1880s, wearing the same hauberks.

It seems funny that in the many years between the 1851 Wilkinson catelog and the purchase by Egypt of 600 to 800 mail hauberks in the 1880s (30 years) there are no images from Wilkinson of these hauberks and no additional references to them (that I can find). Something else that I find amazing is that so far no photos of any of the Khedives forces wearing armor has surfaced, you would think with all of the drawings and descriptions someone would have taken a picture, I am still waiting for one to turn up.

[estcrh]

For anyone interested in Khedival Egypt and Sudanese mahdi period armor I have put together a Pinterest site with all of the armor images I have found so far, although I probably have a few still hidden on my hard drive that I will add if they turn up and I will add any I find at a later date. I also have a general Khedive of Egypt Pinterest site with some great photos etc.

Armor of Khedival Egypt and the Sudanese Mahdist state.
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...ese-mahdist-s/

The Khedive of Egypt.
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...ives-of-egypt/

[LinusLinothorax]

Originally Posted by estcrh

For anyone interested in Khedival Egypt and Sudanese mahdi period armor I have put together a Pinterest site with all of the armor images I have found so far, although I probably have a few still hidden on my hard drive that I will add if they turn up and I will add any I find at a later date. I also have a general Khedive of Egypt Pinterest site with some great photos etc.

Armor of Khedival Egypt and the Sudanese Mahdist state.
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...ese-mahdist-s/

The Khedive of Egypt.
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...ives-of-egypt/

Amazing! Maybe you or someone else here could do something similiar for the other armours which will come together in this thread?

[Jim McDougall]

Excellent responses and great detail and information everyone!
Linus has a great suggestion regarding the spectrum of body armours which have come into the discussion here, and while analogous to this discussion they all certainly have their own histories.

What is excellent here is the participation of so many in discovering more on the history of these armours and revising or reinforcing published data and generally held perceptions as required. It is our best hope that members and readers here continue research and share findings,
here we learn together!

Excellent notes pertaining to the helmet production Estcrh, and interesting to see that this material is misquoted, unfortunately not at all uncommon in early writings. However I would note here that Wikipedia is not entirely a useless source, but indeed must be used with caution and as you say, the sources must be rechecked. This is as far as I have known, pretty standard procedure for all published material, and just as with those resources, pertinent data must be rechecked. These are all benchmarks for further research.

Regarding the Wilkinson data, probably the best source for confirmation would be Mr Robert Wilkinson himself. He is a brilliant scholar, author and archivist who probably has more data on anything Wilkinson or associated than anyone else. It seems quite possible that some instances of material on these topics might have come from personal contact with him as he is quite active online and most helpful to peoples queries.

It is remarkable that a single 'chestnut' like the 1899 reference noted by Estrcrh can be the seed for numerous misquotes and notions in so much subsequent material. That is why what we do here is so important, and it is virtually incumbent on us to resolve these matters and preserve the corrected data.

Ian, what a fascinating aside on the 'Blemmyes'! and thank you for the interesting true story on this folklore. It is indeed intriguing to see how visual perceptions of armour in use, often somewhat outlandish to be sure, could lead to these bizarre notions and tall tales.

nKante, what a superb job of recreating this amazing armour and dress! This is excellent to see the key items used by these warriors in full dimension and preserving this wonderful heritage. Bravo!!!

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by LinusLinothorax

Amazing! Maybe you or someone else here could do something similiar for the other armours which will come together in this thread?

I have done just that for many types of armor, weapons, photos etc.
https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiques/

You just need a data base of photos and correct information that can be merged together so that people can learn from what you have created. I often hear people talk about 'research", but if it is not readly and easily available to anyone then what good is the best reasearch, it may as well not exist. At one point I used Photobucket, Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia to store photos and information but Pinterest allows anyone to instantly create a searchable database for whatever they have an interest in, as you can see.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Ibrahiim, there is a difference between what people write and being able to prove it. The Wikipedia information is completely useless, check the citations and see if you can follow them to a verifiable source, I can not. As for the Wilkinson catelog from the 1860s, do you have a link to it? The only catelog from Wilkinson that I am aware of that describes what we are looking for is a 1851 exhibition catelog were they do describe mail hauberks and gauntlets, but they only mention their use in India, nothing about Egypt, no mention of split links either. It also mentions bridles, you can not control your horse if the bridle is cut. Ottoman-uniforms does not suppy any real proof in the way of verifiable sources that I can fins showing Wilkinson was involved in making either the hauberk or the helmets.

The book that mentions Wilkinson swords involvement in mail hauberk production has been misquoted, in this book "Khartoum campaign, 1898: or the re-conquest of the Soudan By Bennet Burleigh" 1899, the writer says that it is the helmets that were made by Wilkinson, not the mail hauberks. Please carefully read the quote from the book that I have provided below.
"Coats of chain-mail old and new, and steel helmets. Most of the latter are quite modern, being part of the 600 supplied by a London firm of sword makers-Wklkinson & Co. Pall Mall." Notice it reads latter, which would refer to the helmets I believe since the hauberks are mentioned before the the helmets.

All of the mentions in later books and web sites etc seem to be using the quote from this book to back up their claims that Wilkinson had anything to do with the mail hauberls purchased in England for the Khedives forces. If you or anyone else has any additional proof I would be more than happy to learn something new.

Below I have provided the quote directly from the 1851 Wilkinson catelog and the book I mention and a photo of what I believe to be one of the later made 1880s split link key chain mail hauberks next to a drawing of Khedive soldiers, 1880s, wearing the same hauberks.

It seems funny that in the many years between the 1851 Wilkinson catelog and the purchase by Egypt of 600 to 800 mail hauberks in the 1880s (30 years) there are no images from Wilkinson of these hauberks and no additional references to them (that I can find). Something else that I find amazing is that so far no photos of any of the Khedives forces wearing armor has surfaced, you would think with all of the drawings and descriptions someone would have taken a picture, I am still waiting for one to turn up.

Salaams estcrh, You wrote.......Quote."The Wikipedia information is completely useless, check the citations and see if you can follow them to a verifiable source, I can not". Unquote. ....

I wrote "Taking the question of English produced armour..."It appears so..." and under that; the content carefully placed in quotation marks..

It may well be that a quotation is proven to be partially incorrect but it is not the fault of the author who exposes/refers to the information ...Note my carefully worded starter "It appears so" ...which is rather like saying ..."It is said that"......

Wikepedia information is however, not useless. It operates like a huge search engine and encyclopedia and as you know corrections are invited. Broadly speaking we take the information from such libraries and sift it ...model it...and present it so that it then passes before our very eyes and into Library...where it still may be scrutinized ...I think we avoid using such terminology as ..."It is completely useless"...etc. etc. whereas I am entirely in support of correcting such mistakes as have already appeared even in well accepted authors works down the ages.

It remains, however, important to follow and expose details as we discover them and it has always been my technique to present what I find in support of threads by looking into every possibility to hand... which includes Forum Library, books and the web...thus occasionally Wikepedia (which I find excellent) and even Pinterest.

I even noted privately when it began, that Pinterest makes an excellent addition to Forum content, however, it is not the be all and end all to web based research as it is generally all about pictures...and there are other areas to obtain details....It may be noted how in the past a storage system of pictures collapses leaving Forum without photographs thus great care has to be taken before investing our Libraries details and credibility in a potentially vanishing format...

Here is a classic thread full of interest in an area otherwise hardly exposed before... but now with a bright Forum light shining on it !!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams estcrh, You wrote.......Quote."The Wikipedia information is completely useless, check the citations and see if you can follow them to a verifiable source, I can not". Unquote. ....

I wrote "Taking the question of English produced armour..."It appears so..." and under that; the content carefully placed in quotation marks..

It may well be that a quotation is proven to be partially incorrect but it is not the fault of the author who exposes/refers to the information ...Note my carefully worded starter "It appears so" ...which is rather like saying ..."It is said that"......

Wikepedia information is however, not useless.
I even noted privately when it began, that Pinterest makes an excellent addition to Forum content, however, it is not the be all and end all to web based research as it is generally all about pictures...and there are other areas to obtain details....It may be noted how in the past a storage system of pictures collapses leaving Forum without photographs thus great care has to be taken before investing our Libraries details and credibility in a potentially vanishing format...

Ibrahiim, I think I did not make myself clear enough, sorry about that, I meant that in THIS particular instance, the information on the origins of Khedival armor was (to me at least) completely useless....because when I tried to find the information in the references that were used in the article they led nowhere (at least for me), one reference did not show up at all when I searched for it and the other was a modern book that when searched did not show the information that the article said it contained. I was in no way saying that you believed the information to be true, you were just pointing it out, and I was just pointing out my thoughts on the usefullness of the references as research material.


As for Pinterest, I invite you to take some time and throughly look at my Pinterest site, it is certainly not "all about pictures" unless you want it to be. Besides pictures you can post books, articles and essays, pdfs, you can write your own research papers and convert them to a .jpg and post them on pinterest, you can post links to websites and articles. It is a complete storage system that allows you to categorize images and information in a way that no other system I am aware of allows you to do. People who shrug off Pinterest as only being about "pictures" have not taken a good look at its possibilities.

It may be noted how in the past a storage system of pictures collapses leaving Forum without photographs thus great care has to be taken before investing our Libraries details and credibility in a potentially vanishing format.

The lack of image uploading upgrades has left this forum in the past, the small images size and lack of inline attachments makes it very hard to post images and add appropriate matching text, this limits what people will post on the forum and I am sure many people just do not bother to post images here at all due to these limitations. So as a storage system for images the forum also has some its on problems.


Here is an example of what you can do with Pinterest besides posting pretty pictures.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...21cfbb667c.png

[estcrh]

AFRICAN KNIGHTS:The Armies of Sokoto, Bornu and Bagirmi in the 19th Century by Conrad Cairns, 2006, covers the period that began with the Sokoto jihad in 1804 and ended with the extinction of the Savannah states by the European powers in the 20th c, provides a brief history of the three states and examines the arms, equipment and methods of warfare used by their armoured 'knights' and infantry, sections on horses, artillery, flags, fortifications, clothing, with photographs and engravings.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Ibrahiim, I think I did not make myself clear enough, sorry about that, I meant that in THIS particular instance, the information on the origins of Khedival armor was (to me at least) completely useless....because when I tried to find the information in the references that were used in the article they led nowhere (at least for me), one reference did not show up at all when I searched for it and the other was a modern book that when searched did not show the information that the article said it contained. I was in no way saying that you believed the information to be true, you were just pointing it out, and I was just pointing out my thoughts on the usefullness of the references as research material.


As for Pinterest, I invite you to take some time and throughly look at my Pinterest site, it is certainly not "all about pictures" unless you want it to be. Besides pictures you can post books, articles and essays, pdfs, you can write your own research papers and convert them to a .jpg and post them on pinterest, you can post links to websites and articles. It is a complete storage system that allows you to categorize images and information in a way that no other system I am aware of allows you to do. People who shrug off Pinterest as only being about "pictures" have not taken a good look at its possibilities.

The lack of image uploading upgrades has left this forum in the past, the small images size and lack of inline attachments makes it very hard to post images and add appropriate matching text, this limits what people will post on the forum and I am sure many people just do not bother to post images here at all due to these limitations. So as a storage system for images the forum also has some its on problems.


Here is an example of what you can do with Pinterest besides posting pretty pictures.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...21cfbb667c.png

Salaams estcrh, Regretably you mixed up two references...One from Wikepedia and the other with the actual quote was from my second reference http://www.ottoman-uniforms.com/egy...xpedition-1883/ ...Therefor Wikepedia in this instance is vindicated.

It is interesting that there are actually few accounts of the Hicks expedition not least because there were few people left alive to recount the details because it was almost totally annihilated.

I use Pinterest occasionally as it can be seen that the images are excellent. Unfortunately their website insists that users join another media site to access and frankly it puts me off as I consider it an invasion of privacy...but certainly it is worth considering ..though as I say ...I am very happy using a broad range of research concepts and since books on the subject are quite difficult to get here the web fills in as second best....We are after all ...it should be remembered ...also a web based information retrieval cell...

I will certainly look in at your site. Meanwhile good luck with the African Armour details.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.