Main > The Armoury
Historical Accuracy in Maille- are Bingo Wings strictly a modern issue?
Sir William:
Hmm...that depends; according to this effigy, BW armor may have been on the field after all:
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/846/3313/
See? I should've held onto my bell-bottom armed original hauberk. lol
I'm kidding, I figured that was artistic license moreso than an eye for accuracy. Am I wrong in that assumption?
Sir William:
And here's another one, German, Otto von Orlamunde, 1340.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/3193/3138/
Looks like his sleeve blouses to allow for his brig-style vambrace. I'd think that'd be a pain to have flapping about in a fight. Thoughts, anyone?
Ian:
I've seen a decent chunk of representative artwork that suggests bingo-wings on the forearms are used specifically with forearm armor intentionally worn as the inner layer so the maille is intended to be draped over the rigid protection. Same with upper arm bingo-wings. When the rerebrace connects to the doublet, and the maille is bloused over the rerebrace the maille needs bingo-wings to drape properly. But if maille is the inner-most defense, then it obviously needs to be fitted. :) So bingo-wings are historical, IF the maille is being draped over another piece of armor. I'm sure there are counter-examples, but that's a good rule of thumb.
Sir William:
That's worth keeping in mind- but I'm reasonably sure I won't go that route. I didn't care for that look. I remember you mentioning that in some Italian armors, they'd wear a mail piece instead of pauldrons/spaulders?
Ian:
Italy ca. 1400
ca. 1380
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version