Yes, the bars on the back allowed it to be sewed onto leather. Thats patently obvious.
No, they are not effective armour and neither should they be classed as 'armour' so your correction is at best in error and it is certainly misleading to do so.
Such small domes are like carrying a ciggerette case of silvered metal in your pocket or having a big shiny belt buckle in the shape of Texas. Maybe if the bullet or knife happened to hit you there it might stop it. Maybe. They are small & thin.
Clearly these are not intended as protection of any consequence even if they do look fashionable.
If only the opponent was so obliging where they wounded you! Such happenings are about extreme good fortune and not about calling an object like that an example of armour in any sense.
i.e; In the Spring & Autumn period one prince of Qi (Xiao-bo) was saved from assasination when an arrow stuck his belt buckle, and his survival was not known by the assasin (Guan Zhong) since he played dead.
Should we then declare equally that a bronze belt buckle is a form of ancient Chinese armour.? I have a number of these too...see http://z8.invisionfr...hp?showtopic=23
and the answer of course is no.
Do you have an example in a Zhou Chinese account where a small dome similarily stopped such a injury anyway? Is that the purpose of the domes as you are implying?
.....or were you just expressing your opinion with undue authority?
Of 3 scholars who have each written on ancient armours (Yang, Dien, Dong,) they all agree with the more sensible view that such small bronze fittings as these little domes do not represent armour and are purely for decoration purposes.
They are not considered effective, and the first metal armour in China occurs some centuries later.
This is proven in that once iron comes into use there is true metal armour and it takes an entirely different form as connecting lamellar plates mimicing the leather forms, and such gaudy domes were even before this abandoned in the more serious era of the East Zhou warfare. They were not practical, just like the bells and rattles on earlier style chariots which were abandoned over time also.
Bronze domes are a fashion, and a dead end. As Yang Hong said only the richest people could afford to add these items to leather armour. Bronze of anything other than these tiny domes (i.e openwork plaques or discs) are extremely rare.
In later times some wealthy peoples iron armour was gilt with gold and silver. This gilding was not to increase armour value either.
Following the link on post #7 will show you the consensus amongst authors on bronze fittings as decoration, and the earliest metal armour being iron.
These domes after all are no more than the size of a coin and do not occur in numbers to suggest they were numerous enough to be armour in function or effectiveness, (& to answer TMPikachu)
i.e In one excavation small bronze fixtures were found in a cluster around the feet only and were thought to be on a pair of boots. In another instance there were a number of domes on a piece of head gear. The rest of the bodies in those cases lacked the domes & fixtures.
These are ornaments. They are decoration only.
Wingchuntaiji, Do you have any examples where a tiny stud like this was positioned on armour in a way to deflect blows? How can you deduce thus was the purpose? Do you even know where or how they were positioned on the body?
Any evidence at all or supporting commentary?
This sort of statement is in contradiction to my own....I detect the postings of Master Randy Li.
I am not interested in CHF becoming an arena like Chicochai. Bring some facts or evidence before the idle speculation begins.
Please don't hijack this topic. The comments on this class of bronze dome is based on previous scholarship and my personal observation instead of just personal fantasy more akin to a Kung Fu movie.
The chances of you even seeing a West Zhou bronze dome from off armour like this before you made your comments are pretty low. Do not try and bluff on subjects such as this.
If you state such things with false authority you will only confuse the readers & I will not tolerate it unless you do it responsibly and with some basis in fact.
Congrats on passing the Xiucai scholar exam.
If you want to add to the topic of 'did Chinese wear bronze body armour'
as was discussed at length in a previous month the link is there but I would expect there to be some use of evidence or sources or sound logic if you are to re-open the debate.
Edited by Kenneth, 13 February 2007 - 07:06 PM.