From the spread of books I've read, I get the picture that leather was more in use in Asia than in Europe. Is this innacurate? I really don't know what to think (as some of these books just had China as an extra bit, so I don't figure I'd get out too much from it)
Was it ever mixed?
and is iron/steel armor 'always' superior to leather? That's the idea I have in my head, maybe too many videogames...
is iron/steel armor of equivilant size/coverage significantly heavier than leather, or is there too much variety in both to generalize?
Full Version: use of leather and iron in armor
what leather? Even leather armours have distinctions, Rhino hides make great armour, until they are slaughtered to extinction(of course the horns for medicine is another factor)
QUOTE(warhead @ Jan 18 2006, 01:47 PM) [snapback]4784582[/snapback]
what leather? Even leather armours have distinctions, Rhino hides make great armour, until they are slaughtered to extinction(of course the horns for medicine is another factor)
I was thinking about that, extint rhinos. I guess to clarify
'all leathers for armor'
Like... was rhino hide better for armor than ox hide? Or did the technique of pressing hides together allow multiple ox hides to be as strong as a lesser amount of rhino (if it is stronger in the first place)
did the extintion of rhinos lead to more use of bronze armor?
That sort of thing, I want to find out more about the relationship of leather and iron.
In my head, the general idea I have of leather to iron is sorta like the idea of bronze-->iron as a level of advancement. But I really don't know enough about this topic to say for sure if it could be called advancement and so on.
During Shang dynasty there is evidence of leather armour and shields...although none survive bronze fittings were attched to the armour for decoration only.
The Shang also had elaborate bronze helmets with grotesque faces on them. These would not be the typical infantrymans armour of course.
In Zhou there is physical evidence for lamellar leather armour, including horse armour of leather that has survived. They were dyed different colours like red & black or blue and red etc. Some wooden burial objects depict lamellar style plates and these wil be leather also. Bronze helmets were still in existence but these are simplified in form from the Shang design, quite plain save for a simple crest. They would still not be typical items.
As warhead said even by the Spring and Autumn period the Rhino was no longer a source for armour, being hunted to extinction. (Edit; Note the date here is my own and I need to check it isnt more correctly DURING the Spring and Autumn the local extinction occurs)Laquered leather plates were used after this date...and even during later-Han leather armour still existed because of the economy of outfitting troops (as per A. Dien).
By late East Zhou there is the first evidence of iron armour & iron lamellar helmets. These still rare. The Qin tomb army is a represntation of leather armour, much like the Qin retained bronze for weapons the iron of this time is not as good as the Han era steel.
Examples of iron armour have been found in the Zhou state of Yan which also includes caches of early iron weapons in more 'modern' forms such as the Han style ji halberd. This is from a late Zhou era site but it seems to be only just emerging. Of course iron for weapons had existed since the beginning of the Warring States period, yet armour is a late development.
Note; evidence for actual 'bronze armour' is almost non-existent. I still have doubts over plates called 'bronze' armour since it appears bronze was only a decorative fixture (as per Y. Hong). Actual bronze armour is not known to exist beyond the fittings and helmets outlined above. These plates in private collections may be decorative as well, or not even attached to armour at all.)
The Qin tomb has more recently revealed 'stone' armour which is a tomb-only creation in the pattern of armour that was most likely leather in life, although bronze and iron could be considered. Just becuase none has been found doesnt mean it will never be found. That is specualtive though.
Apart from showing that Qin DID have lamellar helmets the stone suits also had suits of horse armour, full suits with only the horses head exposed. (The earlier Zhou leather armour included masks for the horses.)
It appears horse armour is rare indeed, it is not depicted in tomb items and the # of finds are very few.
The Qin also had shields (although helmets and shields are not found with the troops) and these are the style used in Han in also.
The Han initally inherited a China much like Qin but by the middle of the first century BC bronze was obselete as a weapon and iron armour would no doubt be well on the way to effectively replacing leather lamellar as the principal armour. The finds from earlier West Han tombs are mostly interpreted as leather (although some might debate this I agree with J. Rawson & A. Dien). The physical armour on JingDi's buried army was leather which rotted away and this dates from the same early period. (Traces visible on the Yangling ceramic figures I have posted on other armour threads on CHF). These Han figures also included lamellar helmets of the Qin style.
Not all the soldiers were armoured however.
Iron lamellar helmets and armour shirts have been found in Han tombs. The earlier period had larger plates with less # in a suit and later styles become more fine with greater # smaller plates. Earlier tomb armies like QIn and West Han do have some individuals with this fine style alongside the more simple armour vest & these 'fish scale' types were assocaited with officers. As time progressed the finer armour become more common however.
Since I re-installed photoshop on my PC if you would like some photographs of the armour I refer to above let me know which are of interest and I can post a few as examples.
The Shang also had elaborate bronze helmets with grotesque faces on them. These would not be the typical infantrymans armour of course.
In Zhou there is physical evidence for lamellar leather armour, including horse armour of leather that has survived. They were dyed different colours like red & black or blue and red etc. Some wooden burial objects depict lamellar style plates and these wil be leather also. Bronze helmets were still in existence but these are simplified in form from the Shang design, quite plain save for a simple crest. They would still not be typical items.
As warhead said even by the Spring and Autumn period the Rhino was no longer a source for armour, being hunted to extinction. (Edit; Note the date here is my own and I need to check it isnt more correctly DURING the Spring and Autumn the local extinction occurs)Laquered leather plates were used after this date...and even during later-Han leather armour still existed because of the economy of outfitting troops (as per A. Dien).
By late East Zhou there is the first evidence of iron armour & iron lamellar helmets. These still rare. The Qin tomb army is a represntation of leather armour, much like the Qin retained bronze for weapons the iron of this time is not as good as the Han era steel.
Examples of iron armour have been found in the Zhou state of Yan which also includes caches of early iron weapons in more 'modern' forms such as the Han style ji halberd. This is from a late Zhou era site but it seems to be only just emerging. Of course iron for weapons had existed since the beginning of the Warring States period, yet armour is a late development.
Note; evidence for actual 'bronze armour' is almost non-existent. I still have doubts over plates called 'bronze' armour since it appears bronze was only a decorative fixture (as per Y. Hong). Actual bronze armour is not known to exist beyond the fittings and helmets outlined above. These plates in private collections may be decorative as well, or not even attached to armour at all.)
The Qin tomb has more recently revealed 'stone' armour which is a tomb-only creation in the pattern of armour that was most likely leather in life, although bronze and iron could be considered. Just becuase none has been found doesnt mean it will never be found. That is specualtive though.
Apart from showing that Qin DID have lamellar helmets the stone suits also had suits of horse armour, full suits with only the horses head exposed. (The earlier Zhou leather armour included masks for the horses.)
It appears horse armour is rare indeed, it is not depicted in tomb items and the # of finds are very few.
The Qin also had shields (although helmets and shields are not found with the troops) and these are the style used in Han in also.
The Han initally inherited a China much like Qin but by the middle of the first century BC bronze was obselete as a weapon and iron armour would no doubt be well on the way to effectively replacing leather lamellar as the principal armour. The finds from earlier West Han tombs are mostly interpreted as leather (although some might debate this I agree with J. Rawson & A. Dien). The physical armour on JingDi's buried army was leather which rotted away and this dates from the same early period. (Traces visible on the Yangling ceramic figures I have posted on other armour threads on CHF). These Han figures also included lamellar helmets of the Qin style.
Not all the soldiers were armoured however.
Iron lamellar helmets and armour shirts have been found in Han tombs. The earlier period had larger plates with less # in a suit and later styles become more fine with greater # smaller plates. Earlier tomb armies like QIn and West Han do have some individuals with this fine style alongside the more simple armour vest & these 'fish scale' types were assocaited with officers. As time progressed the finer armour become more common however.
Since I re-installed photoshop on my PC if you would like some photographs of the armour I refer to above let me know which are of interest and I can post a few as examples.
I've read in a source that Rhino armour was still used during Tang.
The kingom of Chu used extensive Rhino armour.
The kingom of Chu used extensive Rhino armour.
When is this comment about Chu using Rhino armour made do you know? It shouldnt be after the spring & autumn period. Is is however a southern state and a late member to the Zhou system, perhaps even obtaining Rhino from elsewhere since Rhino have survived in areas outside what was 'China' at that time, as the same species does still exist today.
The Rhino is gone from the central plains by the end of the Spring & Autumn period, being hunted to local extinction..
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/030010111...glance&n=283155
Is the only reference I can find online (a new book on extinction suggesting not much scope beyond the Shang & West Zhou periods for Rhino armour, and alternatives required by the end of the Spring & Autumn).
I will need to find my own references at home for actual dates.
Once I refresh my memory whether the Spring and Autumn is the end period of extinction or if that was when it was already extinct I will see if Francois can do a search of Sima Qian for 'Chu' & 'Rhino'.
If you can give some more details that would help.
I dont know about Rhino armour in Tang. Sounds wierd. It seems to be only remarked of as the most ancient of armours. What springs to mind is that ivory makes its way into China from outside after the elephant is extinct in China and depictations of African animals are common in Tang art, even ostriches being used as spirit gaurdians at the tomb of Tang emperors, and Rhino also depicted in statues.
For what purpose the Tang would make Rhino suits after steel was availible I dont know.
Could you recall the context Tang 'rhino armour' was mentioned in, or what it was for?
Edit; The Osprey text on Shang-Zhou period mentions Rhino armour being used because the Rhino was plentiful untill 500BC. It says 4 layers of Rhino skin were layered for armour, and the account of modern rhino put the tough armour of a Rhino at 4'' thick!
I doubt Osprey as a matter of course, and dont think Rhino extinction goes from 'plentiful' to 'extinct' and more likely this is the end period for the Rhino in central plains China...after centuries of hunting and dwindling.
Other texts I read earlier have mentioned the ancient extinction of the Rhino, although these were books I read long before the Osprey picture books. I can only hazard a geuss where they were although various British museum series and J. Rawsons books spring to mind. I will check a few more yet for the dates given.
The Rhino is gone from the central plains by the end of the Spring & Autumn period, being hunted to local extinction..
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/030010111...glance&n=283155
QUOTE
....for 1,000 years the standard armor worn by Chinese soldiers was made from rhino hide...
Is the only reference I can find online (a new book on extinction suggesting not much scope beyond the Shang & West Zhou periods for Rhino armour, and alternatives required by the end of the Spring & Autumn).
I will need to find my own references at home for actual dates.
Once I refresh my memory whether the Spring and Autumn is the end period of extinction or if that was when it was already extinct I will see if Francois can do a search of Sima Qian for 'Chu' & 'Rhino'.
If you can give some more details that would help.
I dont know about Rhino armour in Tang. Sounds wierd. It seems to be only remarked of as the most ancient of armours. What springs to mind is that ivory makes its way into China from outside after the elephant is extinct in China and depictations of African animals are common in Tang art, even ostriches being used as spirit gaurdians at the tomb of Tang emperors, and Rhino also depicted in statues.
For what purpose the Tang would make Rhino suits after steel was availible I dont know.
Could you recall the context Tang 'rhino armour' was mentioned in, or what it was for?
Edit; The Osprey text on Shang-Zhou period mentions Rhino armour being used because the Rhino was plentiful untill 500BC. It says 4 layers of Rhino skin were layered for armour, and the account of modern rhino put the tough armour of a Rhino at 4'' thick!
I doubt Osprey as a matter of course, and dont think Rhino extinction goes from 'plentiful' to 'extinct' and more likely this is the end period for the Rhino in central plains China...after centuries of hunting and dwindling.
Other texts I read earlier have mentioned the ancient extinction of the Rhino, although these were books I read long before the Osprey picture books. I can only hazard a geuss where they were although various British museum series and J. Rawsons books spring to mind. I will check a few more yet for the dates given.
Rhino armour is partislly, some would say mostly, a moral boost over simple ox leather.
Leather armour was common in East and West throughout history. It's less glamerous but still very cost effective. Leather could be boiled in oil, shaped on a former (and layered like plywood if desired) then dried out and lacquered. In europe this was a very common source of breatplates to be worn under mail etc...
Leather armour was common in East and West throughout history. It's less glamerous but still very cost effective. Leather could be boiled in oil, shaped on a former (and layered like plywood if desired) then dried out and lacquered. In europe this was a very common source of breatplates to be worn under mail etc...
i Wonder if Giraffe cavalry would be effective lol
QUOTE
When is this comment about Chu using Rhino armour made do you know? It shouldnt be after the spring & autumn period. Is is however a southern state and a late member to the Zhou system, perhaps even obtaining Rhino from elsewhere since Rhino have survived in areas outside what was 'China' at that time, as the same species does still exist today.
Rhino is mainly used by southern states for armour. Here is an exerpt from Wu Yue Chun Qiu regarding the rhino armour of the Wu army. 今夫差衣水犀甲者十有三万人。
30% of FuChai's present army wears rhino armour. The date of this would be the early 5th century b.c. which is right at the end of the spring and autumn period, obviously, Rhino wasn't extinct during this time for its still the dominant form of armour in the southern armies.
Maybe I'm just really bad at Chinese, but shouldn't it be 30,000 instead of 30 percent? Unless his entire army is composed of one hundred thousand.
This is a wild cattle leather armor I collected.
In anciet times, people use leather to make Jia; In anciet times, people use iron to make Kai.
古之用皮，制之为甲；古之用钢，制之为铠。
In anciet times, people use leather to make Jia; In anciet times, people use iron to make Kai.
古之用皮，制之为甲；古之用钢，制之为铠。
QUOTE
Maybe I'm just really bad at Chinese, but shouldn't it be 30,000 instead of 30 percent? Unless his entire army is composed of one hundred thousand.
Yes, 30,000 troops that makes up 30 percent of the whole army.
When I asked Francois about Rhino armour he said I should give him 'a couple of weeks' to research and to my surprise he meant it. To my own shame I have not done much to find more information beyond checking my home volumes and entirely forgot about the thread untill the e-mail below turned up (I include a part here). The other modern texts I recall hearing mention of Rhino armour would need tracking down, yet I accept that the end of the Spring and Autumn period (perhaps even early Warring States) is likely the period where Sumatran rhino are vanished/vanishing from the central plains. It is only ever mentioned in the context of archaic China in the histories I have read and it not one I have come accross in commentary of the Warring States/late East Zhou period in the way the crossbow, cavalry & longswords are often mentioned. When I find anything conclusively stated while rereading one such book or another I will post it here also. I suspect J. Rawson or one of the British museum publications is where I saw it.
...posted here from Francois e-mail;
(as a footnote I have often wondered how the Chinese hunted the Rhino in late Shang & early Zhou times, bearing in mind the alleged 4'' of natural leather armour. Much like hunting the mammoth though it may not require incredibly powerful weapons but a degree of persistence and bleeding.
Extinctions of megafauna and specific species in several instances even in the last several hundred years can show that within a century (if not decades)unrestrained hunting can cause animal populations to crash and reach a point of local or total extinction.)
PS;
Athena, I recommend you get some raw linseed oil for the Han longsword you have and with a fine modelling brush apply it to the wooden hilt or scabbard remains. Wait a few days and repeat. Several coats will soak in and stop the wood from futher decaying and flaking away.
The iron could have a very fine oil applied in the same way. The ancient iron soaks it up over a day or 2 and then repeat. Either gun oil (to protect the iron cracks from oxegen & moisture) or even sewing machine oil would be better than nothing. Gun oil will not harm the wood, so this is quite suitable.
I am told an 'air tight pressurised sealed case is best to preserve' iron
...but that isn't going to happen. Some other steps need taking to conserve such truly ancient blades. Dessicant gels are not enough by themselves.
Given how well preserved your Han jian was I suggest protecting it from moisture somehow so it can last for future people.....and keep that cat away from it!
...posted here from Francois e-mail;
QUOTE
The Shi Ji has little relevant information, most of the references are to a title (“rhino head”), the name rhino given to brave soldiers in very old chapters, etc. but not real reference to rhino armors.
I have found three occurrences of the word in the ZuoZhuan, though (these are probably the only ones)
1- Year 12 of duke Zhuang (681 BC), in Song, an enemy of the prince is seized and killed while drunk, and his body is enveloped in a rhino hide, to conceal it I think (to be cut into pieces and put into salt later…).
2- (the most relevant one) Year 2 of duke Xuan (606 BC), the prince of Song, besieged in a city, says (bragging) “…there is no lack of rhinoceros, we can spare a couple of armors”, this seems to refer to rhino hides (here is the exact quote 牛 則 有 皮 ． 犀 兕 尚 多 ． 棄 甲 則 那 ) This indicates that there were rhinoceros in Song in the late 7th century.
3- Year 9 of duke Ding (500BC), in Qi, the funeral chariot bringing the body of an important person is depicted as covered by rhino hide.
The quote mentioning 30,000 armour suits does not concern Chu but Wu. It comes from the Wuyue Chunqiu, not a primary source by far (it was written during the 2nd century AD, in the eastern Han, ie more than 500 years, three dynasties and a couple of civil wars after the events it describes). In my opinion, it belongs to the ‘fictional history” genre: rewritten and embellished real events, a genre which did not originate with the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
I have a number of concerns about the quotation;
1- the text says “water rhino”, this is a strange word, I am no zoologist but I think rhinos live on dry land, could water rhino mean another animal? I could not find it in the dictionary… And by the way, Wu is said to have been full of marshes at the time, not good rhino country…
2- As usual the number of rhino armors seems just crazy, 30 000 men means a lot of rhinos, at a time (5th century) when in Qi (some 150 km north), rhino hides were considered precious.
I have found three occurrences of the word in the ZuoZhuan, though (these are probably the only ones)
1- Year 12 of duke Zhuang (681 BC), in Song, an enemy of the prince is seized and killed while drunk, and his body is enveloped in a rhino hide, to conceal it I think (to be cut into pieces and put into salt later…).
2- (the most relevant one) Year 2 of duke Xuan (606 BC), the prince of Song, besieged in a city, says (bragging) “…there is no lack of rhinoceros, we can spare a couple of armors”, this seems to refer to rhino hides (here is the exact quote 牛 則 有 皮 ． 犀 兕 尚 多 ． 棄 甲 則 那 ) This indicates that there were rhinoceros in Song in the late 7th century.
3- Year 9 of duke Ding (500BC), in Qi, the funeral chariot bringing the body of an important person is depicted as covered by rhino hide.
The quote mentioning 30,000 armour suits does not concern Chu but Wu. It comes from the Wuyue Chunqiu, not a primary source by far (it was written during the 2nd century AD, in the eastern Han, ie more than 500 years, three dynasties and a couple of civil wars after the events it describes). In my opinion, it belongs to the ‘fictional history” genre: rewritten and embellished real events, a genre which did not originate with the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
I have a number of concerns about the quotation;
1- the text says “water rhino”, this is a strange word, I am no zoologist but I think rhinos live on dry land, could water rhino mean another animal? I could not find it in the dictionary… And by the way, Wu is said to have been full of marshes at the time, not good rhino country…
2- As usual the number of rhino armors seems just crazy, 30 000 men means a lot of rhinos, at a time (5th century) when in Qi (some 150 km north), rhino hides were considered precious.
(as a footnote I have often wondered how the Chinese hunted the Rhino in late Shang & early Zhou times, bearing in mind the alleged 4'' of natural leather armour. Much like hunting the mammoth though it may not require incredibly powerful weapons but a degree of persistence and bleeding.
Extinctions of megafauna and specific species in several instances even in the last several hundred years can show that within a century (if not decades)unrestrained hunting can cause animal populations to crash and reach a point of local or total extinction.)
PS;
Athena, I recommend you get some raw linseed oil for the Han longsword you have and with a fine modelling brush apply it to the wooden hilt or scabbard remains. Wait a few days and repeat. Several coats will soak in and stop the wood from futher decaying and flaking away.
The iron could have a very fine oil applied in the same way. The ancient iron soaks it up over a day or 2 and then repeat. Either gun oil (to protect the iron cracks from oxegen & moisture) or even sewing machine oil would be better than nothing. Gun oil will not harm the wood, so this is quite suitable.
I am told an 'air tight pressurised sealed case is best to preserve' iron
...but that isn't going to happen. Some other steps need taking to conserve such truly ancient blades. Dessicant gels are not enough by themselves.Given how well preserved your Han jian was I suggest protecting it from moisture somehow so it can last for future people.....and keep that cat away from it!
Rhino didn't dissapear during warring states, not by a long shot.
Here is a Chinese report on the history of Rhino. Its after the Han when climate became cooler that large number of rhino dissapeared.
"据2003年8月27日《中国文物报》李先登先生的《漫谈青铜犀尊》一文中：中国古代青铜犀尊还说明，在汉代及其以前，黄河及长江流域的气候比今天温暖湿润，当时广泛分布着犀牛。从商代甲骨文来看，当时称犀牛为兕。例如《殷墟文字乙编》2507就记载了一次田猎获兕达71头之多。到了东周时期，长江流域仍生存着大量的犀牛。如《墨子?公输篇》：“荆有云梦，犀兕麇鹿满之”。当时盛行以犀革制甲，用于护身。如《楚辞?国殇》首句即为：“操吴戈兮披犀甲，车错彀兮短兵接”就是证明。此后一方面由于汉代以后中国大地气候变冷了，而另一方面更为重要的是由于大量滥杀，所以今天在中国境内已经没有犀牛了，并且在亚洲今天仅仅印度尼西亚的苏门答腊还有双角犀。 "
In the Western Han, in the tomb of empress dowager Bo(mother of WenDi), there was a buried living rhino which was killed and buried.
There are a buch of interesting animals which existed in ancient China that are now extinct. Its another interesting topic to research into.
Furthermore
國語‧越語: 今夫差衣水犀之甲者億有三千，不患其志行之少恥也，而患其眾之不足也。(interestingly, this account only mention 3,000 Wu soldiers opposed to 30,000 in the wu yue chun qiu)
三國吳‧韋昭注： 犀形似豕而大，今徼外所送，有山犀、水犀。水犀之皮有珠甲，山犀則無. This is written during the 3 kingdom period, it still mentions Rhino armour and distinguish the water rhinos and mountain rhinos and how water rhinos are the ones that armours came from.
"1- the text says “water rhino”, this is a strange word, I am no zoologist but I think rhinos live on dry land, could water rhino mean another animal? I could not find it in the dictionary… And by the way, Wu is said to have been full of marshes at the time, not good rhino country…"
Here are some more Rhino accounts"
《关尹子?五鉴》：“譬如犀牛望月，月形入角，特因识生， 始有月形，而彼真月，初不在角。”谓犀牛望月久，故感其影于角。
明陈继儒《太平清话》卷四：“吕东莱畜犀带一围，文理缜密，中有一月影，过望则见，盖犀牛望月之久，故感其影于角。”后因形容长久盼望。
Water Rhinos are said to look at the moon often, thats when poachers catch them and butcher their horns. Interestingly, Tai Ping Qing Hua is written during the Ming dynasty. Which means that Rhinos still exist in China at that time in restricted areas.
Interestingly, there are claims that Rhino haven't been extinct in China until 1922. And there are still recent reports of possible rhinos in Tibet.
中国犀牛似乎到1922年才灭绝 [萨苏] The site below describe records of killing rhino during the Ming and Qing for medicine. http://www.pep.com.cn/200308/ca285908.htm
Here is a Chinese report on the history of Rhino. Its after the Han when climate became cooler that large number of rhino dissapeared.
"据2003年8月27日《中国文物报》李先登先生的《漫谈青铜犀尊》一文中：中国古代青铜犀尊还说明，在汉代及其以前，黄河及长江流域的气候比今天温暖湿润，当时广泛分布着犀牛。从商代甲骨文来看，当时称犀牛为兕。例如《殷墟文字乙编》2507就记载了一次田猎获兕达71头之多。到了东周时期，长江流域仍生存着大量的犀牛。如《墨子?公输篇》：“荆有云梦，犀兕麇鹿满之”。当时盛行以犀革制甲，用于护身。如《楚辞?国殇》首句即为：“操吴戈兮披犀甲，车错彀兮短兵接”就是证明。此后一方面由于汉代以后中国大地气候变冷了，而另一方面更为重要的是由于大量滥杀，所以今天在中国境内已经没有犀牛了，并且在亚洲今天仅仅印度尼西亚的苏门答腊还有双角犀。 "
In the Western Han, in the tomb of empress dowager Bo(mother of WenDi), there was a buried living rhino which was killed and buried.
There are a buch of interesting animals which existed in ancient China that are now extinct. Its another interesting topic to research into.
Furthermore
國語‧越語: 今夫差衣水犀之甲者億有三千，不患其志行之少恥也，而患其眾之不足也。(interestingly, this account only mention 3,000 Wu soldiers opposed to 30,000 in the wu yue chun qiu)
三國吳‧韋昭注： 犀形似豕而大，今徼外所送，有山犀、水犀。水犀之皮有珠甲，山犀則無. This is written during the 3 kingdom period, it still mentions Rhino armour and distinguish the water rhinos and mountain rhinos and how water rhinos are the ones that armours came from.
"1- the text says “water rhino”, this is a strange word, I am no zoologist but I think rhinos live on dry land, could water rhino mean another animal? I could not find it in the dictionary… And by the way, Wu is said to have been full of marshes at the time, not good rhino country…"
Here are some more Rhino accounts"
《关尹子?五鉴》：“譬如犀牛望月，月形入角，特因识生， 始有月形，而彼真月，初不在角。”谓犀牛望月久，故感其影于角。
明陈继儒《太平清话》卷四：“吕东莱畜犀带一围，文理缜密，中有一月影，过望则见，盖犀牛望月之久，故感其影于角。”后因形容长久盼望。
Water Rhinos are said to look at the moon often, thats when poachers catch them and butcher their horns. Interestingly, Tai Ping Qing Hua is written during the Ming dynasty. Which means that Rhinos still exist in China at that time in restricted areas.
Interestingly, there are claims that Rhino haven't been extinct in China until 1922. And there are still recent reports of possible rhinos in Tibet.
中国犀牛似乎到1922年才灭绝 [萨苏] The site below describe records of killing rhino during the Ming and Qing for medicine. http://www.pep.com.cn/200308/ca285908.htm
Hi Warhead,
I would agree with you that the extinction of the rhino in china came much later than the springs and autumns. However, my impression was that the point of this thread was about the prevalence of rhino hide armours on battlefields.
It is quite possible that the extinction of rhinos was a relatively slow process, going from rhino hides being fairly common (and thus being "produced" in large enough quantities to allow a prince to equip a fraction of his army with rhino armours), to being rare (at which point rhino armours would become mostly ceremonial/kingly outfits), to being exceptional, which seems to be the case during the Han, or the empress would not have been buried with one.
The Zuozhuan examples I quote seem to bear witness of this process : rhino hides were relatively common in Song and Qi in the 7th century, but had apparently become exceptional by the beginning of the Warring States.
I have checked the Guoyu, and found two interesting references to the word (out of a total of three in the whole work, plus one occurence of the character in the name of a person):
The first one is a quotation from Guan Zhong, adressing duke Huan of Qi (7th century BC)
管 子 對 曰 ： 「 制 重 罪 贖 以 犀 甲一 戟 ， 輕 罪 贖 以 犀 盾 一 戟 ，...
Guan Zi answered : "let grave offences be redeemed by offering a set of rhino armour, and lesser offences by offering a shield of rhino skin,..."
This seems to confirm the idea that rhino hides were still fairly common in the 7th century.
The second one is the one you give
今夫差衣水犀之甲者億有三千，不患其志行之少恥也，而患其眾之不足也。
Note the presence of 今 in the beginning of the sentence, a telltale sign that this belongs to a discourse. If we look at the context, this sentence comes from a quotation of king Guojian, here is the passage :
句 踐 既 許 之 ， 乃 致 其 眾 而誓 之 曰 ： 「 寡 人 聞 古 之 賢 君 ， 不 患 其 眾 之 不 足 也 ， 而 患其 志 行 之 少 恥 也 ． 今 夫 差 衣 水 犀 之 甲 者 億 有 三 千 ， 不 患其 志 行 之 少 恥 也 ， 而 患 其 眾 之 不 足 也 ． 今 寡 人 將 助 天 滅之 ． 吾 不 欲 匹 夫 之 勇 也 ， 欲 其 旅 進 旅 退 ． 進 則 思 賞 ， 退則 思 刑 ， 如 此 則 有 常 賞 ． 進 不 用 命 ， 退 則 無 恥 ， 如 此 則有 常 刑 ． 」
Now, here is a rapid translation of the beginning of the quote :
"I heard that the great rulers of old were not worried by the size of their armies, but by the justice of their intents and conduct. Now, although Fuchai "has more than three thousand soldiers wearing water rhino armours", he does not care about the purity of his intent and conduct, but about the number of his troops. I will therefore assist the Heavens in destroying him..."
Although the expression 衣 水 犀 之 甲 者 億 有 三 千 litterally means "has more than three thousand soldiers wearing water rhino armours", it might not be a factual description of the army of Fuchai, but a rhetorical comment on his military strength, a metaphor, in fact.
More precisely, the expression 億 有 三 千 could be a "vague number". In classical chinese, three is often used to mean "several, a couple", and rhino armour could be a metaphor referring to "excellent armor", as such, the sentence could be loosely translated as "Fuchai has quite a few well equipped soldiers". This sort of makes sense in the context : what would be the point of giving a detailed and accurate description of the number and equipment of Fuchai in a discussion about his moral attitude?
The presence of a similar sentence in the Wuyue Chunqiu (written half a millenium later) probably only proves that its author used the Guoyu as one of his sources (note also that the Guoyu was compiled well after the events occurred). The author of the Wuyue Chunqiu apparently took this expression at face value and expanded on it.
The reason why I think it is a metaphor is that if rhino armours were common in some armies of the period, we would see more of them in the many texts on this period.
As such, I think the Guoyu confirms my previous idea that rhino skins probably had become very rare by the end of the springs and autumns, although rhinos were probably not extinct by then. Therefore, it would be likely that rhino armours were not much used in armies of this era (although the name could have survived to designate especially well prepared leather armours).
I will try to look further into Wei Zhao's commentary of the Guoyu, and do a search in the Zhanguoce tonight or later in the week end.
Francois
I would agree with you that the extinction of the rhino in china came much later than the springs and autumns. However, my impression was that the point of this thread was about the prevalence of rhino hide armours on battlefields.
It is quite possible that the extinction of rhinos was a relatively slow process, going from rhino hides being fairly common (and thus being "produced" in large enough quantities to allow a prince to equip a fraction of his army with rhino armours), to being rare (at which point rhino armours would become mostly ceremonial/kingly outfits), to being exceptional, which seems to be the case during the Han, or the empress would not have been buried with one.
The Zuozhuan examples I quote seem to bear witness of this process : rhino hides were relatively common in Song and Qi in the 7th century, but had apparently become exceptional by the beginning of the Warring States.
I have checked the Guoyu, and found two interesting references to the word (out of a total of three in the whole work, plus one occurence of the character in the name of a person):
The first one is a quotation from Guan Zhong, adressing duke Huan of Qi (7th century BC)
管 子 對 曰 ： 「 制 重 罪 贖 以 犀 甲一 戟 ， 輕 罪 贖 以 犀 盾 一 戟 ，...
Guan Zi answered : "let grave offences be redeemed by offering a set of rhino armour, and lesser offences by offering a shield of rhino skin,..."
This seems to confirm the idea that rhino hides were still fairly common in the 7th century.
The second one is the one you give
今夫差衣水犀之甲者億有三千，不患其志行之少恥也，而患其眾之不足也。
Note the presence of 今 in the beginning of the sentence, a telltale sign that this belongs to a discourse. If we look at the context, this sentence comes from a quotation of king Guojian, here is the passage :
句 踐 既 許 之 ， 乃 致 其 眾 而誓 之 曰 ： 「 寡 人 聞 古 之 賢 君 ， 不 患 其 眾 之 不 足 也 ， 而 患其 志 行 之 少 恥 也 ． 今 夫 差 衣 水 犀 之 甲 者 億 有 三 千 ， 不 患其 志 行 之 少 恥 也 ， 而 患 其 眾 之 不 足 也 ． 今 寡 人 將 助 天 滅之 ． 吾 不 欲 匹 夫 之 勇 也 ， 欲 其 旅 進 旅 退 ． 進 則 思 賞 ， 退則 思 刑 ， 如 此 則 有 常 賞 ． 進 不 用 命 ， 退 則 無 恥 ， 如 此 則有 常 刑 ． 」
Now, here is a rapid translation of the beginning of the quote :
"I heard that the great rulers of old were not worried by the size of their armies, but by the justice of their intents and conduct. Now, although Fuchai "has more than three thousand soldiers wearing water rhino armours", he does not care about the purity of his intent and conduct, but about the number of his troops. I will therefore assist the Heavens in destroying him..."
Although the expression 衣 水 犀 之 甲 者 億 有 三 千 litterally means "has more than three thousand soldiers wearing water rhino armours", it might not be a factual description of the army of Fuchai, but a rhetorical comment on his military strength, a metaphor, in fact.
More precisely, the expression 億 有 三 千 could be a "vague number". In classical chinese, three is often used to mean "several, a couple", and rhino armour could be a metaphor referring to "excellent armor", as such, the sentence could be loosely translated as "Fuchai has quite a few well equipped soldiers". This sort of makes sense in the context : what would be the point of giving a detailed and accurate description of the number and equipment of Fuchai in a discussion about his moral attitude?
The presence of a similar sentence in the Wuyue Chunqiu (written half a millenium later) probably only proves that its author used the Guoyu as one of his sources (note also that the Guoyu was compiled well after the events occurred). The author of the Wuyue Chunqiu apparently took this expression at face value and expanded on it.
The reason why I think it is a metaphor is that if rhino armours were common in some armies of the period, we would see more of them in the many texts on this period.
As such, I think the Guoyu confirms my previous idea that rhino skins probably had become very rare by the end of the springs and autumns, although rhinos were probably not extinct by then. Therefore, it would be likely that rhino armours were not much used in armies of this era (although the name could have survived to designate especially well prepared leather armours).
I will try to look further into Wei Zhao's commentary of the Guoyu, and do a search in the Zhanguoce tonight or later in the week end.
Francois
QUOTE(Kenneth @ Feb 9 2006, 10:03 PM) [snapback]4789405[/snapback]
Athena, I recommend you get some raw linseed oil for the Han longsword you have and with a fine modelling brush apply it to the wooden hilt or scabbard remains. Wait a few days and repeat. Several coats will soak in and stop the wood from futher decaying and flaking away.
The iron could have a very fine oil applied in the same way. The ancient iron soaks it up over a day or 2 and then repeat. Either gun oil (to protect the iron cracks from oxegen & moisture) or even sewing machine oil would be better than nothing. Gun oil will not harm the wood, so this is quite suitable.
I am told an 'air tight pressurised sealed case is best to preserve' iron ...but that isn't going to happen. Some other steps need taking to conserve such truly ancient blades. Dessicant gels are not enough by themselves.
Given how well preserved your Han jian was I suggest protecting it from moisture somehow so it can last for future people.....and keep that cat away from it!
The iron could have a very fine oil applied in the same way. The ancient iron soaks it up over a day or 2 and then repeat. Either gun oil (to protect the iron cracks from oxegen & moisture) or even sewing machine oil would be better than nothing. Gun oil will not harm the wood, so this is quite suitable.
I am told an 'air tight pressurised sealed case is best to preserve' iron
...but that isn't going to happen. Some other steps need taking to conserve such truly ancient blades. Dessicant gels are not enough by themselves.Given how well preserved your Han jian was I suggest protecting it from moisture somehow so it can last for future people.....and keep that cat away from it!
Kenneth, thanks for your advice! I have gun oil which I use for old blade, but don't have linseed oil yet. I'm planning to do it.
"I have a number of concerns about the quotation;
1- the text says “water rhino”, this is a strange word, I am no zoologist but I think rhinos live on dry land, could water rhino mean another animal? I could not find it in the dictionary… And by the way, Wu is said to have been full of marshes at the time, not good rhino country…
2- As usual the number of rhino armors seems just crazy, 30 000 men means a lot of rhinos, at a time (5th century) when in Qi (some 150 km north), rhino hides were considered precious. "
1 “Water rhino” possibly include other animals, like "water buffalo", wild buffalo, and elephant. When I collected the Yi armor, the local people told me the best armor was made of elephant, rhinoand, and wild buffalo's leather.
By the end of last year, a museum spent plenty of money on purchasing a set of Yi General's armor of the Three Kingdom period style. Some parts of the armor were made of buffalo's leather, and some part were made of rhino's leather.
Also in ZuoZhuan, "吴越之多坚甲，亦由地产犀兕。周礼职方氏扬州：“其畜宜鸟兽”，郑注谓"兽为犀象之属"，可略见吴越之特产足为制造甲盾之资矣" it says, animals refer to rhino and elephant.
2 "今夫差衣水犀之甲者，亿有三千" means 130,000 or 10,3000 troops, not 3000, or 30,000. I quote offical website and scholar's articles as follows:
课文《勾践灭吴》中有这样的一句话：“今夫差衣水犀之甲者亿有三千。”教材注释为：
“穿着水犀皮制成的铠甲的士卒有十万三千人。”
国语越语记勾践伐吴誓师之辞云：
“今夫差衣水犀之甲者，亿有三千”。
吴越春秋 勾践伐吴外传 记勾践誓辞亦云：“今夫差衣水犀之甲者十有三万人”。
淮南子兵略篇 更谓夫差有 “带甲七十万”。七十万之数末免妄诞，亿有三千或十三万之数则颇近情理
1- the text says “water rhino”, this is a strange word, I am no zoologist but I think rhinos live on dry land, could water rhino mean another animal? I could not find it in the dictionary… And by the way, Wu is said to have been full of marshes at the time, not good rhino country…
2- As usual the number of rhino armors seems just crazy, 30 000 men means a lot of rhinos, at a time (5th century) when in Qi (some 150 km north), rhino hides were considered precious. "
1 “Water rhino” possibly include other animals, like "water buffalo", wild buffalo, and elephant. When I collected the Yi armor, the local people told me the best armor was made of elephant, rhinoand, and wild buffalo's leather.
By the end of last year, a museum spent plenty of money on purchasing a set of Yi General's armor of the Three Kingdom period style. Some parts of the armor were made of buffalo's leather, and some part were made of rhino's leather.
Also in ZuoZhuan, "吴越之多坚甲，亦由地产犀兕。周礼职方氏扬州：“其畜宜鸟兽”，郑注谓"兽为犀象之属"，可略见吴越之特产足为制造甲盾之资矣" it says, animals refer to rhino and elephant.
2 "今夫差衣水犀之甲者，亿有三千" means 130,000 or 10,3000 troops, not 3000, or 30,000. I quote offical website and scholar's articles as follows:
课文《勾践灭吴》中有这样的一句话：“今夫差衣水犀之甲者亿有三千。”教材注释为：
“穿着水犀皮制成的铠甲的士卒有十万三千人。”
国语越语记勾践伐吴誓师之辞云：
“今夫差衣水犀之甲者，亿有三千”。
吴越春秋 勾践伐吴外传 记勾践誓辞亦云：“今夫差衣水犀之甲者十有三万人”。
淮南子兵略篇 更谓夫差有 “带甲七十万”。七十万之数末免妄诞，亿有三千或十三万之数则颇近情理
http://de.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/roritades...adesu/my_photos
As it seems, that the Internet has no single good photograph of the awesome laquered leather armour that was found in the tomb of the marquis Yi but the ugly misinterpretation in "Anicent Chinese armour" and one b/w picture, I have uploaded the ones I took two years ago. I was especially enchated by the construction and design of the spaulder/rerebrace.
The pictures might be of interest to you gentleman, as the type of anicent horesarmour that was mentioned further upward in this thread was on display in the museeum too.
As it seems, that the Internet has no single good photograph of the awesome laquered leather armour that was found in the tomb of the marquis Yi but the ugly misinterpretation in "Anicent Chinese armour" and one b/w picture, I have uploaded the ones I took two years ago. I was especially enchated by the construction and design of the spaulder/rerebrace.
The pictures might be of interest to you gentleman, as the type of anicent horesarmour that was mentioned further upward in this thread was on display in the museeum too.
QUOTE
It is quite possible that the extinction of rhinos was a relatively slow process, going from rhino hides being fairly common (and thus being "produced" in large enough quantities to allow a prince to equip a fraction of his army with rhino armours), to being rare (at which point rhino armours would become mostly ceremonial/kingly outfits), to being exceptional, which seems to be the case during the Han, or the empress would not have been buried with one.
Well, the 3 kingdom still mentions rhino armour even if its rare.QUOTE
As such, I think the Guoyu confirms my previous idea that rhino skins probably had become very rare by the end of the springs and autumns, although rhinos were probably not extinct by then. Therefore, it would be likely that rhino armours were not much used in armies of this era (although the name could have survived to designate especially well prepared leather armours).
Where is your source for this? Because Zhong guo wen Wu bao said that rhinos only became rare after the Han.
QUOTE(warhead @ Feb 10 2006, 05:55 PM) [snapback]4789573[/snapback]
Well, the 3 kingdom still mentions rhino armour even if its rare.
Are you sure about that? A quick search for the word in the San Guo Zhi yields a couple of mentions of rhino hides and horns kept as valuables, but I couldn't find any mention in the text of rhino armour.
As for the quote you posted (三國吳‧韋昭注： 犀形似豕而大，今徼外所送，有山犀、水犀。水犀之皮有珠甲，山犀則無), note that it is a commentary (not the text itself) by Wei Zhao (died 273 AD), who also commented the Guoyu, I will look at the Guoyu tonight, but it is quite possible that this is in fact a copy of a commentary of Wei Zhao on the Guoyu, which does mention rhinos (I would not be surprised if it was his commentary to the passage on Fuchai which you quote)
EDITED : just checked, (2) is a part of the Wei Zhao commentary on the Guoyu on (1) (which is an excerpt from the text). Either the attribution to the Sanguozhi is mistaken, or a commentary to it actually quotes the Wei Zhao commentary on the Guoyu (this is not an unusual situation, the Shi Ji commentaries often quote commentaries from other works).
(1) 國語‧越語: 今夫差衣水犀之甲者億有三千，不患其志行之少恥也，而患其眾之不足也。
(2) 三國吳‧韋昭注： 犀形似豕而大，今徼外所送，有山犀、水犀。水犀之皮有珠甲，山犀則無.
The complete commentary on (1) is interesting, btw :
言多也。犀形似豕而大，今徼外所送，有山犀、水犀。水犀之皮有珠甲，山犀則無.。億有三千，所謂賢良也，若今備衛士矣。
I might be wrong, but doesn't the last part of it says that 30 000 out of 100 000 represent the number of elite soldiers, equivalent to the modern "trained guards"? If so, I think it reinforce the idea that the reference to rhino armor is more or less a metaphor here. If so, we have no reference in these texts (Guoyu and Zuozhuan) which speaks of rhino armors after the seventh century...
QUOTE(warhead @ Feb 10 2006, 05:55 PM) [snapback]4789573[/snapback]
Where is your source for this? Because Zhong guo wen Wu bao said that rhinos only became rare after the Han.
No source, just an observation from the few mentions of rhinos in the Zuozhuan, Shiji and Guoyu. I will have a look at the Zhanguoce and the Han Shu this week end. Not also that rarity is a relative idea : it is quite possible that during the Han, there were quite a few rhinos living in china (in which sense, they would not be that rare), but in remote regions, and therefore that rhino skins and horns were pretty rare because they were difficult to get. My point on this is that there probably was a moment when rhino hides were just too rare and expensive to be used as battle armours, and would mostly be kept as valuable things (like gold, say).
Francois
QUOTE
No source, just an observation from the few mentions of rhinos in the Zuozhuan, Shiji and Guoyu. I will have a look at the Zhanguoce and the Han Shu this week end. Not also that rarity is a relative idea : it is quite possible that during the Han, there were quite a few rhinos living in china (in which sense, they would not be that rare), but in remote regions, and therefore that rhino skins and horns were pretty rare because they were difficult to get. My point on this is that there probably was a moment when rhino hides were just too rare and expensive to be used as battle armours, and would mostly be kept as valuable things (like gold, say).
I don't think it has much to do with the rarity of rhinos than the superiority of mast produced iron. Besides, demographic studies of China shows the change in climate and Zhong guo wen Wu bao done by a professional in this area clearly states that Rhinos only became rare after the Han.
It is not that the Sumatran Rhino is extinct, as it isn't even extinct even today, but when local extinction or scarcity just makes it no longer a viable way to equip an expanded army.
As the mobilisation of massed infantry emerge during the late ZHou (often hundreds of thousands) corresponding with the increasing scarcity of Rhino (if not a local extinction in the area of the central plains during Zhou) then even if 40% of the army is armoured (taking Han % for ease) then lacquered leather and later iron is the armour type of note from these times on. Even the nobilities armour found in tombs by the Han period, gilt and 'fish scaled' is iron.
Much like troops still had archaic bronze dagger axes cast as late as Song for ceremony then the existence of Rhino armour in singular prestigious references into later periods does not mean this is a reflection of the period Chinese battlefield.
When stocks of animals decline to a point then exploitation of them to equip the huge army of that period would be unproductive beyond perhaps 'elite/ceremonial' armours.
I cannot read Chinese so the Han era account of Rhino supplied by Warhead above means nothing to me but it is common knowledge that the Han empire expand into areas the Shang & Zhou would have never hunted in. The expansion of the Han south may include new Rhino areas since the species still exists outside China. Whether Rhino existed in ancient Tibet or modern day Yunnan or Viet Nam would have little impact on armour of the late East Zhou geography (in particular the 'northern' states).
Yang Hong does not even make mention of rhino armour as a specific stlye, a strange ommision since he contributes much discussion on each periods armours.
Clearly Rhino is associated with archaic China yet evidence for it in literature and excavation is not abundant even in the ancient period.
I will visit the library and find the texts that mentioned this as the armour topic seems alive again, but the existence of Rhino in Han-era terrotory does not seem to mean a return to Rhino armour as a style of note.
Funnily enough I re-read Albert Diens' article on armour and don't see mention of Rhino at all, again only 'lacquered leather' (re: Marquis of Yi) suggesting that no remarkable exploitation of a singular species even existed in the 5th century BC China. He refers only to physical specimens that have survived and been excavated, and again to not note the armour of the period was specifically Rhino seems odd.
I would assume a variety of material were used (as was suggested), and a greater number of layers in other commoner lacquered hides may have been used also.
The general trend is 'leather' to 'iron' in such discussions with overlap but a general change in preponderance.
I will seek out what else I can from the modern commentaries on Chinese armour.
I wouldn't trust Osprey alone for the idea of the decline in Rhino armour after 500BC if I hadn't seen it elsewhere so it appears I will need to find specific comment by an author with a bit more substance.
I will look for a copy of that new book on extinctions in China. It should have a final answer.
Tang era tombs depict Rhino, but they also depict Ostriches. These were said to depict African rhino at this time.
The Shang era vessels of Bronze would clearly be depicting Rhino in China. Quite when the Rhino vanished in each part of China would be the solution to the issue of availiblity.
Re; The Rhino armour only being replaced because of emergence of iron armour; Iron armour is so late, and the appearance of iron armour in the late East Zhou uneven in the Warring States, so I wouldnt assume for instance that since the Qin didnt use iron (for weapons or armour) like Yan or others that this means the leather Qin used would be Rhino.
It is likely a variety of leathers would be used, and Rhino would not seem to be the logical choice on industrial scale. I presume (to be confirmed) that local extinction would occur in the north first, like Shaanxi, and the general depletion of Rhino should be something like a north to south wave.
...somebody on CHF should have that new extinctions book? It was mentioned some time ago.
If anybody has it then it would be the most specific on the subject.
"The retreat of the elephant; An enviromental history of China"
As the mobilisation of massed infantry emerge during the late ZHou (often hundreds of thousands) corresponding with the increasing scarcity of Rhino (if not a local extinction in the area of the central plains during Zhou) then even if 40% of the army is armoured (taking Han % for ease) then lacquered leather and later iron is the armour type of note from these times on. Even the nobilities armour found in tombs by the Han period, gilt and 'fish scaled' is iron.
Much like troops still had archaic bronze dagger axes cast as late as Song for ceremony then the existence of Rhino armour in singular prestigious references into later periods does not mean this is a reflection of the period Chinese battlefield.
When stocks of animals decline to a point then exploitation of them to equip the huge army of that period would be unproductive beyond perhaps 'elite/ceremonial' armours.
I cannot read Chinese so the Han era account of Rhino supplied by Warhead above means nothing to me but it is common knowledge that the Han empire expand into areas the Shang & Zhou would have never hunted in. The expansion of the Han south may include new Rhino areas since the species still exists outside China. Whether Rhino existed in ancient Tibet or modern day Yunnan or Viet Nam would have little impact on armour of the late East Zhou geography (in particular the 'northern' states).
Yang Hong does not even make mention of rhino armour as a specific stlye, a strange ommision since he contributes much discussion on each periods armours.
Clearly Rhino is associated with archaic China yet evidence for it in literature and excavation is not abundant even in the ancient period.
I will visit the library and find the texts that mentioned this as the armour topic seems alive again, but the existence of Rhino in Han-era terrotory does not seem to mean a return to Rhino armour as a style of note.
Funnily enough I re-read Albert Diens' article on armour and don't see mention of Rhino at all, again only 'lacquered leather' (re: Marquis of Yi) suggesting that no remarkable exploitation of a singular species even existed in the 5th century BC China. He refers only to physical specimens that have survived and been excavated, and again to not note the armour of the period was specifically Rhino seems odd.
I would assume a variety of material were used (as was suggested), and a greater number of layers in other commoner lacquered hides may have been used also.
The general trend is 'leather' to 'iron' in such discussions with overlap but a general change in preponderance.
I will seek out what else I can from the modern commentaries on Chinese armour.
I wouldn't trust Osprey alone for the idea of the decline in Rhino armour after 500BC if I hadn't seen it elsewhere so it appears I will need to find specific comment by an author with a bit more substance.
I will look for a copy of that new book on extinctions in China. It should have a final answer.
Tang era tombs depict Rhino, but they also depict Ostriches. These were said to depict African rhino at this time.
The Shang era vessels of Bronze would clearly be depicting Rhino in China. Quite when the Rhino vanished in each part of China would be the solution to the issue of availiblity.
Re; The Rhino armour only being replaced because of emergence of iron armour; Iron armour is so late, and the appearance of iron armour in the late East Zhou uneven in the Warring States, so I wouldnt assume for instance that since the Qin didnt use iron (for weapons or armour) like Yan or others that this means the leather Qin used would be Rhino.
It is likely a variety of leathers would be used, and Rhino would not seem to be the logical choice on industrial scale. I presume (to be confirmed) that local extinction would occur in the north first, like Shaanxi, and the general depletion of Rhino should be something like a north to south wave.
...somebody on CHF should have that new extinctions book? It was mentioned some time ago.
If anybody has it then it would be the most specific on the subject.
"The retreat of the elephant; An enviromental history of China"
QUOTE
As the mobilisation of massed infantry emerge during the late ZHou (often hundreds of thousands) corresponding with the increasing scarcity of Rhino (if not a local extinction in the area of the central plains during Zhou) then even if 40% of the army is armoured (taking Han % for ease) then lacquered leather and later iron is the armour type of note from these times on. Even the nobilities armour found in tombs by the Han period, gilt and 'fish scaled' is iron.
As already posted in my above post, Rhino did not become extinct in the central plain until nearly modern times.
QUOTE
I cannot read Chinese so the Han era account of Rhino supplied by Warhead above means nothing to me but it is common knowledge that the Han empire expand into areas the Shang & Zhou would have never hunted in.
You know a lot of members here don't read Chinese, so how should I know what it says in particular about the different regions and chronology? China is a big place.Does it for instance name Shaanxi or Henan or any particular state? There is no way of knowing whether it means China or north China in particular (central plains in east Zhou).
QUOTE
I don't think it has much to do with the rarity of rhinos than the superiority of mast produced iron.
I dont see any reason to assume people used Rhino armour untill iron replaced it even if Rhino lingered on.
It is also not the existence of Rhino inside of Han China but the numbers and localities they exist. The iron industry was not of a scale untill the mid second century BC and I dont assume that Rhino is what is meant by 'lacquered leather' in the histories of armour up untill this period.
In my checking so far (I will need to visit the university yet) one text mentions for instance that a Tang dynasty armour of leather was made from layered camel hide.
Just how much Rhino was used earlier, and at what point it would give way to alternate leathers is what I am seeking to find. Different regions of China would have had their own issues, just like the amounts of iron production (or tin mines for bronze) and the types of local woods the different states made bows from produces a local character.
QUOTE
You know a lot of members here don't read Chinese, so how should I know what it says in particular about the different regions and chronology? China is a big place.
Does it for instance name Shaanxi or Henan or any particular state? There is no way of knowing whether it means China or north China in particular (central plains in east Zhou).
Does it for instance name Shaanxi or Henan or any particular state? There is no way of knowing whether it means China or north China in particular (central plains in east Zhou).
I attached a brief quote to explain the main points of all the Chinese texts. Yes, TaiPing Qinghua mentions that Rhinos exist north of the YangZe.
That is a bit enigmatic in terms of dating & geography.
What are the 'modern times' that the Rhino went extinct in China for instance?
I got a little of it translated anyway.
What are the 'modern times' that the Rhino went extinct in China for instance?
I got a little of it translated anyway.
QUOTE
The text seems very specific on the Changjiang, but not that much on the rest (it does say that the climate in the valleys of the Yellow River and Changjiang was hotter until the end of the Han, which allowed large populations of rhinos to survive. After that, most of the specific references are about the Yin/Shang dynasty.
At the end, the article mentions both hunting and climate change for the disparition of the rhino.
Here is the passage which specifically speaks of the eastern Zhou.
到了东周时期，长江流域仍生存着大量的犀牛
At the beginning of the eastern Zhou, the valley of the Changjiang (Yang tse for use, ie; much south of the central plains) still had large populations of rhinos.
At the end, the article mentions both hunting and climate change for the disparition of the rhino.
Here is the passage which specifically speaks of the eastern Zhou.
到了东周时期，长江流域仍生存着大量的犀牛
At the beginning of the eastern Zhou, the valley of the Changjiang (Yang tse for use, ie; much south of the central plains) still had large populations of rhinos.
I checked Mark Elvins book last night at the University library. Jessica Rawsons 'Art & archaeology' has since been removed from the public library since it is over 15 years old (a very stupid reason to clear out books I think) and I couldn't find it at the university. This is where I suspect the comment about Rhino armour in Shang and West Zhou period first came from, but I can't confirm it.
The decline of the Rhino from the East Zhou period onwards is shown pretty consistently by the different sources so far, the articles from warhead, the Osprey comment, Francois' translations and now Mark Elvins book on extinctions in China have a common theme, which I will paraphrase below.
Here is the information relevant to Rhino in the book anyway; (copied out by hand in a condensed form).
Milton mentions the almost military-scale hunts of the Shang and says the Zhou did not continue these hunts on the same scale (at least as ritual for nobility) but that even in Han there are accounts of animal hunts of a scale that surpassed reality, i.e exaggerated..although some later massive hunts of millions of animals (deer etc.) are even marked in stone to commerate the rulers grand fun.
Rhino were almost as wide spread as elephants in archiac China (who he notes also retreated in the advance of the Chinese expansion). The hunting of Rhino was by arrows, traps & fire. Hides were standard armour for 1,000 years in archiac times (again this leaves little room from Shang era into east Zhou for their usage). The horns were used for drinking vessels and the Rhino body parts used for medicine.
Both single horned & double horned species existed in China, both are forest dwellers but they need access to water to fend off mosqitues and are sensitive to cold. In the Tang era royal managerie the cold winters killed off Rhino in Chang'an during the 8th century.
In the far south in the Song dynasty rhino were said to dig themselves into the ground (his book also recorded how the exotic Ming dynasty elephants were said to 'make love face-to-face' in pools of water in the fashion of humans, suggesting not everything chroniclers said about such animals is true).
Rhino were gone from the lower Yangzi by the early Empire (Han)..by the middle empire (Tang) they were a rarity in the West. The Tang emperor Xuanxong in the middle of the 9th century ordered that one found in Quzhou (the West) which was bought to court should be set free in the wilds at Quzhou as he felt anxienty over harming the animal. (quote) Iron armour had long replaced iron armour at this time and rhino were not a military necessity but an exotic curiosity.
The Tang monk/poet Qiji seeing off a friend to the far south said "..amongst southern barbarians.....peacocks.....and rhino rage through the stone strewn wilderness". This was said to be literary imagination of a timid nocturnal creature suggesting a lack of experience with rhino in the wild.
In the south-west of China the rhino hung on untill the late 19th century but are now extinct in China. Climate change influenced the southern retreat as well as a desire of the court for horns as tribute from peripheral regions (isolated populations still sought out) and this put pressure on a slow reproducing species (gestation at 400-550 days for 1 offspring). Habitat destuction played a part also, with forests in northern China being cleared in ancient times.
The picture if we put together half a dozen sources from CHF members appears consistent with the above;
At the beginning of the East Zhou the rhino existed in numbers in the Yangtzi valley (warheads article)
到了东周时期，长江流域仍生存着大量的犀牛
Guan Zhong, adressing duke Huan of Qi (7th century BC)
管 子 對 曰 ： 「 制 重 罪 贖 以 犀 甲一 戟 ， 輕 罪 贖 以 犀 盾 一 戟 ，...
"let grave offences be redeemed by offering a set of rhino armour, and lesser offences by offering a shield of rhino skin,..." (francois)
Duke Xuan (606 BC), the prince of Song boasted that he had plenty of Rhino. (francois)
牛 則 有 皮 ． 犀 兕 尚 多 ． 棄 甲 則 那
Up untill 500BC the rhino was common in China (Osprey/Peers)
By the early empire (Han) the rhino had already vanished from the lower Yangtzi area. (eltin)
In the Western Han, in the tomb of empress dowager Bo(mother of WenDi), there was a buried living rhino which was killed and buried.(warheads article)
climate change at the end of the Han made the regions of the yellow river and Yangtzi less suitable to Rhino. (warheads article)
Rhino are sensitive to cold climate conditions (elvin)
Forest clearance contributed to population depletion (elvin)
a museum spent plenty of money on purchasing a set of Yi General's armor of the Three Kingdom period style. Some parts of the armor were made of buffalo's leather, and some part were made of rhino's leather.(anthena)
Once the Rhino was a rarity it was still hunted as a tribute creature in the peripheral areas it remained. (elvin)
The rhino survived in southern regions long after it was extinct in the north/central plains. (elvin)
Conclusion; Local extinction and what we might consider a north to south 'endangering of the species' would mean that during the population decline in the Zhou period (particularily the central plains states) there would have come a time when hunting the Rhino for equipping armour would not be sustainible or economic in an era of equipping massed infantry formations. The effort and practicality of using increasingly scarce Rhino to even equip 3,000 troops would mean a range of lacquered hides (from cattle, buffalo, camel) are refered to also before and after the emergence of iron armour.
Rhino existed in southern areas of China for much longer than they did in the north. By the Tang they were considered an exotic creature of peripheral regions. Surviving isolated populations continued to suffer hunting and climate pressure, and in the north their forest habitat was also cleared.
The decline of the Rhino from the East Zhou period onwards is shown pretty consistently by the different sources so far, the articles from warhead, the Osprey comment, Francois' translations and now Mark Elvins book on extinctions in China have a common theme, which I will paraphrase below.
Here is the information relevant to Rhino in the book anyway; (copied out by hand in a condensed form).
Milton mentions the almost military-scale hunts of the Shang and says the Zhou did not continue these hunts on the same scale (at least as ritual for nobility) but that even in Han there are accounts of animal hunts of a scale that surpassed reality, i.e exaggerated..although some later massive hunts of millions of animals (deer etc.) are even marked in stone to commerate the rulers grand fun.
Rhino were almost as wide spread as elephants in archiac China (who he notes also retreated in the advance of the Chinese expansion). The hunting of Rhino was by arrows, traps & fire. Hides were standard armour for 1,000 years in archiac times (again this leaves little room from Shang era into east Zhou for their usage). The horns were used for drinking vessels and the Rhino body parts used for medicine.
Both single horned & double horned species existed in China, both are forest dwellers but they need access to water to fend off mosqitues and are sensitive to cold. In the Tang era royal managerie the cold winters killed off Rhino in Chang'an during the 8th century.
In the far south in the Song dynasty rhino were said to dig themselves into the ground (his book also recorded how the exotic Ming dynasty elephants were said to 'make love face-to-face' in pools of water in the fashion of humans, suggesting not everything chroniclers said about such animals is true).
Rhino were gone from the lower Yangzi by the early Empire (Han)..by the middle empire (Tang) they were a rarity in the West. The Tang emperor Xuanxong in the middle of the 9th century ordered that one found in Quzhou (the West) which was bought to court should be set free in the wilds at Quzhou as he felt anxienty over harming the animal. (quote) Iron armour had long replaced iron armour at this time and rhino were not a military necessity but an exotic curiosity.
The Tang monk/poet Qiji seeing off a friend to the far south said "..amongst southern barbarians.....peacocks.....and rhino rage through the stone strewn wilderness". This was said to be literary imagination of a timid nocturnal creature suggesting a lack of experience with rhino in the wild.
In the south-west of China the rhino hung on untill the late 19th century but are now extinct in China. Climate change influenced the southern retreat as well as a desire of the court for horns as tribute from peripheral regions (isolated populations still sought out) and this put pressure on a slow reproducing species (gestation at 400-550 days for 1 offspring). Habitat destuction played a part also, with forests in northern China being cleared in ancient times.
The picture if we put together half a dozen sources from CHF members appears consistent with the above;
At the beginning of the East Zhou the rhino existed in numbers in the Yangtzi valley (warheads article)
到了东周时期，长江流域仍生存着大量的犀牛
Guan Zhong, adressing duke Huan of Qi (7th century BC)
管 子 對 曰 ： 「 制 重 罪 贖 以 犀 甲一 戟 ， 輕 罪 贖 以 犀 盾 一 戟 ，...
"let grave offences be redeemed by offering a set of rhino armour, and lesser offences by offering a shield of rhino skin,..." (francois)
Duke Xuan (606 BC), the prince of Song boasted that he had plenty of Rhino. (francois)
牛 則 有 皮 ． 犀 兕 尚 多 ． 棄 甲 則 那
Up untill 500BC the rhino was common in China (Osprey/Peers)
By the early empire (Han) the rhino had already vanished from the lower Yangtzi area. (eltin)
In the Western Han, in the tomb of empress dowager Bo(mother of WenDi), there was a buried living rhino which was killed and buried.(warheads article)
climate change at the end of the Han made the regions of the yellow river and Yangtzi less suitable to Rhino. (warheads article)
Rhino are sensitive to cold climate conditions (elvin)
Forest clearance contributed to population depletion (elvin)
a museum spent plenty of money on purchasing a set of Yi General's armor of the Three Kingdom period style. Some parts of the armor were made of buffalo's leather, and some part were made of rhino's leather.(anthena)
Once the Rhino was a rarity it was still hunted as a tribute creature in the peripheral areas it remained. (elvin)
The rhino survived in southern regions long after it was extinct in the north/central plains. (elvin)
Conclusion; Local extinction and what we might consider a north to south 'endangering of the species' would mean that during the population decline in the Zhou period (particularily the central plains states) there would have come a time when hunting the Rhino for equipping armour would not be sustainible or economic in an era of equipping massed infantry formations. The effort and practicality of using increasingly scarce Rhino to even equip 3,000 troops would mean a range of lacquered hides (from cattle, buffalo, camel) are refered to also before and after the emergence of iron armour.
Rhino existed in southern areas of China for much longer than they did in the north. By the Tang they were considered an exotic creature of peripheral regions. Surviving isolated populations continued to suffer hunting and climate pressure, and in the north their forest habitat was also cleared.
QUOTE
Are you sure about that? A quick search for the word in the San Guo Zhi yields a couple of mentions of rhino hides and horns kept as valuables, but I couldn't find any mention in the text of rhino armour.
Warhead is referring to the biography of Ma Long in the Jin Shu, not the Sanguo Zhi. Ma Long was a Western Jin general suppressing a Xianbei rebellion in the 270s, and to give his troops greater mobility than the Xianbei cavalry (who used iron lamellar), he dressed them in rhino hide armour.
About the use of rhino armour in the kingdom of Chu, there is a record of it in Shi Ji's 礼书 which said that people of Chu used 鲛鱼 and Rhino leather for their armour, they are as durable and hard as iron and stone. The date given for this seem to be that of Chu Huai Wang's time, or the end of the 4th century B.C.
QUOTE(warhead @ Mar 16 2006, 12:17 AM) [snapback]4795481[/snapback]
About the use of rhino armour in the kingdom of Chu, there is a record of it in Shi Ji's 礼书 which said that people of Chu used 鲛鱼 and Rhino leather for their armour, they are as durable and hard as iron and stone. The date given for this seem to be that of Chu Huai Wang's time, or the end of the 4th century B.C.
Actually, this quote comes from the Xunzi. The Treatise on Rites (礼书) is one of the infamous 10 chapters of the Shiji which were apparently lost in the century which followed Sima Qian death. Most modern authors consider that only its introduction might be authentic, all the rest of the chapter (including this reference) have been copied from the Xunzi by a later author.
Francois
That doesn't change the context of the use of Rhino armour in the end of the 4th century B.C.
QUOTE(warhead @ Mar 21 2006, 12:06 AM) [snapback]4797039[/snapback]
That doesn't change the context of the use of Rhino armour in the end of the 4th century B.C.
No.
We already have enough quotes and detail from each member to not be surprised by this date...especially in the Chu (southern) areas.
A case of rhino armour being used by Chouchi Di troops in the northwestern region, in 433:
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...dpost&p=4801638
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...dpost&p=4801638
The thing is, other than the fact that leather is more cost effective,(which is doubtful by the time of AOF considering the rarity of Rhinos by then) it is far lighter and flexible than metal armours. Thats perhaps the reason it never really exit the scene of combat.
QUOTE (Ianus @ Feb 10 2006, 05:20 PM) 
http://de.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/roritades...adesu/my_photos
As it seems, that the Internet has no single good photograph of the awesome laquered leather armour that was found in the tomb of the marquis Yi but the ugly misinterpretation in "Anicent Chinese armour" and one b/w picture, I have uploaded the ones I took two years ago. I was especially enchated by the construction and design of the spaulder/rerebrace.
The pictures might be of interest to you gentleman, as the type of anicent horesarmour that was mentioned further upward in this thread was on display in the museeum too.
As it seems, that the Internet has no single good photograph of the awesome laquered leather armour that was found in the tomb of the marquis Yi but the ugly misinterpretation in "Anicent Chinese armour" and one b/w picture, I have uploaded the ones I took two years ago. I was especially enchated by the construction and design of the spaulder/rerebrace.
The pictures might be of interest to you gentleman, as the type of anicent horesarmour that was mentioned further upward in this thread was on display in the museeum too.
That link is unavailable now. =(
Do you still have those pictures, hosted somewhere else? If so, could you direct me to them? Thanks
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.