Posts: 25
Threads: 8
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation:
0
I have to some extent studied the results from archeology at Visby, Sweden. Here a swedish army faced a danish one, 1361. It was a very hot summer and the dead (mostly the swedish peasant miltia falling victim to danish/german professionals) were dumped in a mass grave with armour and all to avoid disease spreading.
Anyways, the causes of death is in almost all cases damages to the cranium (mostly crushing but in some cases cutting damages). There after the damages are, in order, to the lower legs, lower arms, thighs, hand and upper arm. In almost all cases the torso itself is rather unharmed (well, what can be said from the bones at least - no serious trauma). This should tell something about the general effectiveness of armour.
Posts: 317
Threads: 19
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
6
Same with a late roman-early byzantine settlement in Dalmatia, namely Iader (modern day Zadar).
2000 graves were examined. Main types of injuries were sharp or projectile-based. Several occasion of collapsed cranium due to some projectile. Most injuries were seen on lower extremities and on skulls.
Mark - Legio Leonum Valentiniani
Posts: 2,730
Threads: 20
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
33
Quote:I have to some extent studied the results from archeology at Visby, Sweden. Here a swedish army faced a danish one, 1361. It was a very hot summer and the dead (mostly the swedish peasant miltia falling victim to danish/german professionals) were dumped in a mass grave with armour and all to avoid disease spreading.
Anyways, the causes of death is in almost all cases damages to the cranium (mostly crushing but in some cases cutting damages). There after the damages are, in order, to the lower legs, lower arms, thighs, hand and upper arm. In almost all cases the torso itself is rather unharmed (well, what can be said from the bones at least - no serious trauma). This should tell something about the general effectiveness of armour.
This is what I have from Thordeman's analysis but it is from notes I took years ago. I'd like to be corrected if it is wrong.
Tibia injuries: 98
Skull injuries: 97
Forearm injuries: 69
Upper arm injuries: 21
Torso injuries: 0
Thigh injuries: 0
Posts: 672
Threads: 7
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation:
3
Also of interest to Byzantine enthusiasts is the remarkable incidence of foot wounds in senior Byzantine leaders.
The emperors John II, Manuel I and the Megas Domestikos (C-in-C Byzantine Army) John Axouch are all recorded as suffering foot wounds in battle. As, presumably, the best-armoured people around it probably reflects the effectiveness of their armour. Manuel I received his wound as he was riding down an archer, the toppling foot-soldier fired an arrow into the sole of the emperor's foot, probably more or less by accident.
Martin
Fac me cocleario vomere!
Posts: 25
Threads: 8
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation:
0
That last one sounds really painful. And, I would assume, Manuel was kinda surprised!
Posts: 25
Threads: 8
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation:
0
Dan Howard: This is probably correct. The source I was looking into is indeed a very old publication of Thordeman while they were still looking into the material, and so the final result of it probably looks something like this (with the exception that they changed the early analysis of the thigh injuries it would seem).
The Tibia injuries seems particulary nasty, one soldier getting both of his feet chopped of in a single sword cut, both feet still hanging on to the body in the sinews it would seem, by the position of the bones.
Posts: 672
Threads: 7
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation:
3
Manuel I again - relevant to chainmail.
In another battle Manuel fought a Hungarian "Grand Zupan" whose name was rendered in Greek usage as Bakchinos. Bakchinos struck the emperor with a sword and "shattered the iron screen dependent from the helmet that protected the emperor's face and eyes." The emperor survived and cut off his opponent's arm with a swordblow.
This sounds very much as though a complete mail aventail, covering the face leaving only eye holes, was damaged by a sword cut. However, it is known that the Byzantines did sometimes use anthropomorphic iron face-masks. A number of them were excavated in Istanbul and a coin of Manuel I was associated with them.
Martin
Fac me cocleario vomere!
Posts: 363
Threads: 5
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
0
Quote:Tibia injuries: 98
Skull injuries: 97
Forearm injuries: 69
Upper arm injuries: 21
Torso injuries: 0
Thigh injuries: 0
This is fascinating, but I wonder how much this is to do with the only evidence of damage coming from the skeletal evidence? For the skull, hands, shins, and forearms, any deep gash could catch the bone. For the upper arm, but especially the thigh, there is a lot more muscle between the skin and the bone to catch a blade but still cause death through damage to blood vessels. (I'm deeply sceptical of the zero wounded thighs, for instance, as this is a very vulnerable area.) Wounds to the abdomen too could miss bone but cause death. The absence of wounds to the ribs would certainly support the effectiveness of armour however.
Posts: 672
Threads: 7
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation:
3
Quote:Dan Howard post=347888 Wrote:Tibia injuries: 98
Skull injuries: 97
Forearm injuries: 69
Upper arm injuries: 21
Torso injuries: 0
Thigh injuries: 0
This is fascinating, but I wonder how much this is to do with the only evidence of damage coming from the skeletal evidence? For the skull, hands, shins, and forearms, any deep gash could catch the bone. For the upper arm, but especially the thigh, there is a lot more muscle between the skin and the bone to catch a blade but still cause death through damage to blood vessels. (I'm deeply sceptical of the zero wounded thighs, for instance, as this is a very vulnerable area.) Wounds to the abdomen too could miss bone but cause death. The absence of wounds to the ribs would certainly support the effectiveness of armour however.
Femoral cut injuries were 12.2% of the total according to a diagram: http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=127514
Martin
Fac me cocleario vomere!
Posts: 363
Threads: 5
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
0
Quote:Femoral cut injuries were 12.2% of the total according to a diagram: http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=127514
Okay, that sounds much more feasible, thanks. Looking at that diagram, I'd guess wounds 16, 17 and 19 were especially deep, and shallower (but still fatal) wounds would be undetected.
Posts: 791
Threads: 23
Joined: May 2010
Reputation:
5
Dan, have you got documentary proof that Indian/Afganistan steel ring chain mail was ineffective against arrows?
As to the skeletons showing the distribution of wounds mainly to the head, arms and legs. This corresponds to the comments of Ammianus who gives graphic accounts of the Romans chasing after their routed opponents and slashing at their necks, backs, thighs, legs and arms. I suppose hacking at whatever you can reach with your sword is the natural action to take rather than trying to run through your opponent whilst runs away.
Adrian Coombs-Hoar
Posts: 168
Threads: 9
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation:
0
I may be imagining things, but I though I read somewhere that seg. became popular with Caesar's troops because of the number of debilitating wounds they were receiving to their shoulders and collar bones in Gaul due to overhead blows from longswords and projectiles during sieges.
There are some who call me ......... Tim?
Posts: 40
Threads: 9
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
2
Anyone knows if it is even possible to get an historical correct chainmail? Or am i forced to buy Indian trash?
Marc Beermann
Posts: 4,863
Threads: 129
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation:
32
Not all of the Indian Chainmail is bad. Al-hamdd uses historically correct stuff except for their ring sizes, which are about 2mm too large.
Posts: 2,730
Threads: 20
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
33
Quote:Not all of the Indian Chainmail is bad. Al-hamdd uses historically correct stuff except for their ring sizes, which are about 2mm too large.
I'd love to see a single museum example that looks anything like the Al-Hamdd mail.
|
