| # | Polity | Coded Value | Tags | Year(s) | Edit | Desc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
"In India, protective body armor was in use around 1600 B.C.E. The Vedic Epics use the word varman to describe what was probably a coat of mail, probably a leather garment or coat reinforced with brass plates at critical points."
[1]
[1]: (Gabriel 2007, 79) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"In India, protective body armor was in use around 1600 B.C.E. The Vedic Epics use the word varman to describe what was probably a coat of mail, probably a leather garment or coat reinforced with brass plates at critical points."
[1]
[1]: (Gabriel 2007, 79) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Coded present due to the following in later Chinese sources, which are relevant for gaining insight on the weapons and armor of Steppe Nomads, as well as being mention as a general characteristic of Steppe Nomad clothing since the 8th century at least. "Even with strong crossbows that shoot far, and long halberds that hit at a distance, the Hsiung-nu would not be able to ward them off. If the armors are sturdy and the weapons sharp, if the repetition crossbows shot far, and the platoons advance together, the Hsiung-nu will not be able to withstand. If specially trained troops are quick to release (their bows) and the arrows in a single stream hit the target together, then the leather outfit and wooden shields of the Hsiung-nu will not be able to protect them. If they dismount and fight on foot, when swords and halberds clash as [the soldiers] come into close quarters, the Hsiung-nu, who lack infantry training, will not be able to cope."
[1]
[1]: Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, p. 203 |
||||||
|
Coded present due to the following in later Chinese sources, which are relevant for gaining insight on the weapons and armor of Steppe Nomads, as well as being mention as a general characteristic of Steppe Nomad clothing since the 8th century at least. "Even with strong crossbows that shoot far, and long halberds that hit at a distance, the Hsiung-nu would not be able to ward them off. If the armors are sturdy and the weapons sharp, if the repetition crossbows shot far, and the platoons advance together, the Hsiung-nu will not be able to withstand. If specially trained troops are quick to release (their bows) and the arrows in a single stream hit the target together, then the leather outfit and wooden shields of the Hsiung-nu will not be able to protect them. If they dismount and fight on foot, when swords and halberds clash as [the soldiers] come into close quarters, the Hsiung-nu, who lack infantry training, will not be able to cope."
[1]
[1]: Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, p. 203 |
||||||
|
According to the Chinese Nan chou i wu chih (A Record of Strange Things in the Southern Regions) written about 222-228 CE a volcanic country called ’Ge-ying’ (thought to be western Java) traded with the Malay Peninsula and imported horses from India. They were used by warriors.
[1]
It is likely they had some basic armour. Dewawarman I may have founded Salakanagara in west West Java 130 CE. He followed Aji Saka who may have introduced ’Buddhism, letters, calendar, etc.’) into Central and East Java 78 CE.
[2]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese: "war, weapon, sword, lance, armour, shield, helmet, banner, battle, siege, fortress, soldier, officer, enemy, spy, etc."
[3]
[1]: (Miksic and Goh 2017, 215) John Norman Miksic. Geok Yian Goh. Routledge. 2017. Ancient Southeast Asia. London. p. 215 [2]: (Iguchi 2015) Masatoshi Iguchi. 2015. Java Essay: The History and Culture of a Southern Country. Troubador Publishing Ltd. [3]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
According to the Chinese Nan chou i wu chih (A Record of Strange Things in the Southern Regions) written about 222-228 CE a volcanic country called ’Ge-ying’ (thought to be western Java) traded with the Malay Peninsula and imported horses from India. They were used by warriors.
[1]
It is likely they had some basic armour. Dewawarman I may have founded Salakanagara in west West Java 130 CE. He followed Aji Saka who may have introduced ’Buddhism, letters, calendar, etc.’) into Central and East Java 78 CE.
[2]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese: "war, weapon, sword, lance, armour, shield, helmet, banner, battle, siege, fortress, soldier, officer, enemy, spy, etc."
[3]
[1]: (Miksic and Goh 2017, 215) John Norman Miksic. Geok Yian Goh. Routledge. 2017. Ancient Southeast Asia. London. p. 215 [2]: (Iguchi 2015) Masatoshi Iguchi. 2015. Java Essay: The History and Culture of a Southern Country. Troubador Publishing Ltd. [3]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
inferred continuity with previous polities in region
|
||||||
|
we need expert input in order to code this variable
|
||||||
|
we would expect the earliest defenses to not have been made of metal and so unlikely to have been preserved
|
||||||
|
we would expect the earliest defenses to not have been made of metal and so unlikely to have been preserved.
|
||||||
|
Not mentioned in the sources, but was in use in the previous polity
|
||||||
|
Not mentioned in the literature. This is interpreted as evidence of absence because this is a culture of low complexity for warfare technology.
|
||||||
|
Used for shields. Code inferred from Abbasid Caliphate
[1]
which occupied Yemen between 751-868 CE. The Sulayhids used African mercenaries
[2]
and Central Sudanic Bornu horseback warriors often wore quilted armour and chainmail and a iron cap-helmet.
[3]
[1]: Hugh N Kennedy. 2001. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the Early Islamic State. Routledge. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/SGPPFNAZ/q/kennedy [2]: (Stookey 1978, 66) Robert W Stookey. 1978. Yemen: The Politics of the Yemen Arab Republic. Westview Press. Boulder. [3]: Jacquelin A Blair. Nicholas Roumas. Fernando Martell advised by Jeffrey L Forgeng. 2011. The Progression of Arms and Armor from Ancient Greece to the European Renaissance across Eurasia and Africa. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. |
||||||
|
Used for shields. Code inferred from Abbasid Caliphate
[1]
which occupied Yemen between 751-868 CE.
[1]: Hugh N Kennedy. 2001. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the Early Islamic State. Routledge. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/SGPPFNAZ/q/kennedy |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in the literature.
|
||||||
|
War garments made of cloth fulfilled a primarily talismanic function and do not constitute armor in the conventional sense of the term: ’The custom of wearing talismanic war garments was well established by the nineteenth century, and some were worn with other northern appurtenances. ‘Their vest was of red cloth, covered with fetishes and saphies in gold and silver; and embroidered cases of almost every colour, which flapped against their bodies as they moved, intermixed with small brass bells, the horns and tails of animals, shells, and knives; long leopards tails hung down their backs, over a small bow covered with fetishes. They wore loose cotton trowsers [ sic], with immense boots of a dull red leather, coming half way up the thigh, and fastened by small chains to their cartouch or waist belt; these were also ornamented with bells, horses tails, strings of amulets, and innumerable shreds of leather; a small quiver of poisoned arrows hung from their right wrist, and they held a long iron chain between their teeth, with a scrap of Moorish writing affixed to the end of it.’
[1]
This was apparently true of many head-coverings as well. Military head-coverings used by leaders offered mystical protection and should not be characterized as helmets in the conventional sense of the term: ’These smocks were usually worn with a talisman-covered cap, and sometimes with additional protective asuma[unknown] hung around the neck.’
[2]
Elaborate talismanic garments were worn by military leaders but not commoners. But Sarbah reports leather helmets: "Ansa the king appeared in full state, accompanied by a large retinue. Before him went his men sounding trumpets and horns, carrying tinkling bells, and playing various kinds of drums, as well as other instruments, which were quite new to the Portuguese. His Gyasi men, that is, bodyguard, were armed with spears, javelins, shields, bows and arrows; on their heads they wore a sort of helmet made of skins thickly studded with shark’s teeth, the same kind of helmets one sees whenever a town company turns out in fighting attire, and as they came with their lord and master, they sang their popular martial airs. The subordinate rulers wore chains of gold and other ornaments, and each of them was attended by two pages, one carrying his master’s shield and arms, and the other a little round stool for him to sit on."
[3]
Although his material refers to an earlier time period, we have assumed that the practice was not abandoned during the Ashanti period.
[1]: McLeod, M. D. (Malcolm D.) 1981. “Asante”, 147 [2]: McLeod, M. D. (Malcolm D.) 1981. “Asante”, 148 [3]: Sarbah, John Mensah 1968. “Fanti National Constitution: A Short Treatise On The Constitution And Government Of The Fanti, Asanti, And Other Akan Tribes Of West Africa Together With A Brief Account Of The Discovery Of The Gold Coast By Portuguese Navigators, A Short Narration Of Early English Voyages, And A Study Of The Rise Of British Gold Coast Jurisdiction, Etc., Etc.”, 57 |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[1]
[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent polities.
|
||||||
|
No evidence has survived for obvious reasons but the presence of shields might indicate use of hide.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
Present in previous and subsequent polities.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
[The gambeson/panzari (made of cloth) was undoubtedly present in the late Commonwealth.]
|
||||||
|
Shields
|
||||||
|
"Hoplite panoplies have been discovered in the so-called Tomb of the Warrior at Vulci, dating to c. 530 B.C., as well as in a tomb at Lanuvium in Latium dating to the early fifth century" (citing Torelli 1989 and Drummond).
[1]
[1]: (Forsythe 2006, 114) Forsythe, Gary. 2006. A Critical History of Early Rome: From Prehistory to the First Punic War. University of California Press. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
’Japanese armorers did not confine themselves to metal, and instead incorporated lighter and ore malleable materials such as leather and silk (or other fibers) along with iron or steel parts.’
[1]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.169. |
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
Zhou Daguan mentions that in the 13th century the Angkorians did not use the hide of cow to make items,
[1]
which may be connected to religious ideas. If that is so, it is likely that leather items were not produced as far back as Funan, when the Indian religions were introduced. Cloth, on the other hand, is used by the Angkorian infantry in the bas-reliefs.
[2]
[1]: (Zhou Daguan 2007, 73) [2]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, 88) |
||||||
|
Leather armor was in use since the Bronze Age, if not before. Herodotus (7.89.1) writes that Phoenicians fighting in the Greco-Persian Wars wore linen armor.
|
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
"There were two types of armor, full body and left arm, both made of quilted cotton."
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 114) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
[The gambeson/panzari (made of cloth) was undoubtedly present in the late Commonwealth.]
|
||||||
|
Evidence of armor made from organic materials has not been recovered from Mehrgarh.
|
||||||
|
Evidence of armor made from organic materials has not been recovered from Mehrgarh.
|
||||||
|
Evidence of armor made from organic materials has not been recovered from Mehrgarh.
|
||||||
|
If "the first archaeologically recognizable, large post-Indus urban settlements are not earlier than the fifth century BC ... solidly visible states ... appear in a sudden profusion in the late first millennium B.C."
[1]
- who was king Stabrobates of India who used war elephants against a queen of Assyria (considered Shammuramat?) in the 9th century BCE?
[2]
One could infer king Stabrobates, if not based there himself, must have subdued and controlled the Kachi Plain region in order to invade Mesopotamia from ’India’. (Another source says Assyria invaded India and were driven out of Pakistan and India).
[3]
Diodorus Siculus says this too, queen Semiramis was based in Bactra (Bactria?).
[4]
If king Stabrobates’s polity controlled the Kachi Plain then we must code the according to the military technology he possessed. This would have included armour. Note: one military historian estimates that the Assyrian army had a strategic range of 2000 km
[5]
which places the Indus region in reach of their forces. According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specific expert) "In India, protective body armor was in use around 1600 B.C.E. The Vedic Epics use the word varman to describe what was probably a coat of mail, probably a leather garment or coat reinforced with brass plates at critical points."
[6]
[1]: (Ahmed 2014, 64) Mukhtar Ahmed. 2014. Ancient Pakistan - An Archaeological History: Volume V: The End of the Harappan Civilization, and the Aftermath. Foursome Group. [2]: (Mayor 2014, 289) Adrienne Mayor. Animals in Warfare. Gordon Lindsay Campbell. ed. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Animals in Classical Thought and Life. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Kistler 2007, 18) John M Kistler. 2007. War Elephants. University of Nebraska Press. Lincoln. [4]: Diodorus Siculus. Delphi Complete Works of Diodorus Siculus. Delphi Classics. [5]: (Gabriel 2002, 9) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [6]: (Gabriel 2007, 79) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Horse armour (bar-gustuwan).
[1]
Ghaznavid and Ghurid armies: leather-covered or metal shields.
[2]
[1]: (Jackson 2003, 17) Peter Jackson. 2003. The Delhi Sultanate: A Political and Military History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [2]: (Wink 1997, 89-90) Andre Wink. 1997. Al-Hind the Making of the Indo-Islamic World. Volume II: The Slave Kings and the Islamic Conquest 11th-13th Centuries. BRILL. Leiden. |
||||||
|
Boots, belts and other aspects of Armour.
[1]
Light tunics, riding trousers.
[2]
[1]: The armies of Bactria 70 BC-450 AD. Montvert, 1997. [2]: (McLaughlin 2016, 77) Raoul McLaughlin. 2016. The Roman Empire and the Silk Routes: The Ancient World Economy and the Empires of Parthia, Central Asia and Han China. Pen and Sword History. Barnsley. |
||||||
|
Coded present due to the following in contemporary Chinese sources, which are relevant for gaining insight on the weapons and armor of Steppe Nomads: "Even with strong crossbows that shoot far, and long halberds that hit at a distance, the Hsiung-nu would not be able to ward them off. If the armors are sturdy and the weapons sharp, if the repetition crossbows shot far, and the platoons advance together, the Hsiung-nu will not be able to withstand. If specially trained troops are quick to release (their bows) and the arrows in a single stream hit the target together, then the leather outfit and wooden shields of the Hsiung-nu will not be able to protect them. If they dismount and fight on foot, when swords and halberds clash as [the soldiers] come into close quarters, the Hsiung-nu, who lack infantry training, will not be able to cope."
[1]
[1]: Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, p. 203 |
||||||
|
Were in use in the Han dynasty
|
||||||
|
needs expert verification
|
||||||
|
No references identified in the literature.
|
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time and code has yet to receive an expert check
|
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time
|
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time
|
||||||
|
not mentioned in literature
|
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time
|
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time
|
||||||
|
not mentioned in literature
|
||||||
|
Probably for shields and body armour?
|
||||||
|
"... a fragment of a leather-covered circular wooden shield has survived, bearing a painting of a mounted warrior. This was found in the ruins of the castle of Mug, east of Samarkand, and with it were many documents dating the destruction of the place to the eighth century - when the Persian prince who held it rebelled against the local Arab ruler."
[1]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. |
||||||
|
given the wide array of offensive weapons it would be surprising if nothing had evolved to counter them. for example, shields and helmets to absorb the blow of crushing weapons like the mace and battle-axe. we would expect the earliest defenses to not have been made of metal and so unlikely to have been preserved.
|
||||||
|
Given the wide array of offensive weapons it would be surprising if nothing had evolved to counter them. for example, shields and helmets to absorb the blow of crushing weapons like the mace and battle-axe. We would expect the earliest defenses to not have been made of metal and so unlikely to have been preserved.
|
||||||
|
"Crew and horses could be armoured with tough rhinoceros hide, either in the form of scales swen onto a cloth backing, or made into one-piece sleeveless coats like the leather ’buff coats’ of seventeenth century Europe"
[1]
Inferred from Zhou/Shang: there is no evidence that the Zhou were armed differently than the Shang (evidence of helmets, shields, and leather armor used in the Shang).
[2]
[1]: (Peers 2013, 16) [2]: (Peers 2013, 10) |
||||||
|
Leather and fabrics certainly incorporated into armour as padding, straps etc.
|
||||||
|
Widespread use of armor seems to have developed alongside rise of large infantry forces only in Warring States period, 5th c. BCE.
[1]
[2]
[1]: (Dien 1981) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/F82EE9ZF. [2]: (Tin-bor Hui 2005) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/CSPZPNV5?. |
||||||
|
Dien
[1]
notes that the earliest evidence of armor is a leather breastplate from a tomb at Anyang in 1000 BCE. Unclear if it was ornamental or practical, but the next evidence comes from warring states period -- still unclear how widespread armor use was before warring states. However, this reference is from 1981 and a lot of archaeology has been done since then. Given the wide array of offensive weapons it would be surprising if nothing had evolved to counter them. for example, shields and helmets to absorb the blow of crushing weapons like the mace and battle-axe. we would expect the earliest defenses to not have been made of metal and so unlikely to have been preserved. an ornamental breastplate logically would have been based on a practical counterpart.
[1]: (Dien 1981, 6) |
||||||
|
There is no evidence that the Zhou were armed differently than the Shang (evidence of helmets, shields, and leather armor used in the Shang)
[1]
"no major improvements can be proven until the early Chou, when more flexible corsets began to be fabricated by employing lamellar construction techniques that linked small leather panels together with hempen cord."
[2]
In the Zhou period "The conscripted foot soldiers wore sheepskin jackets"
[3]
[1]: (Peers 2013, 10) [2]: (Peers 2011, 441) [3]: (Meyer 1994, 132) Milton Walter Meyer. 1994. China: A Concise History. Second Edition, Revised. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Lanham. |
||||||
|
Some writers report wooden and leather shields: "Salinas, writing in 1571 (second letter), says that the Indians in the vicinity of Santiago have copper axes, ( ) shields made of tapir skin and of wood, and spear throwers."
[1]
[1]: Stirling, Matthew Williams. 1938. “Historical And Ethnographical Material On The Jivaro Indians.”, 78-79 |
||||||
|
No finds interpreted as armor or protection in fight.
|
||||||
|
"The soldiers of the Old and Middle Kingdom wore no armour. In the Old Kingdom they are usually depicted wearing only a belt and a small triangular loincloth, and by the Middle Kingdom their costume was invariably the same short linen kilt as that worn by civilian workmen. [...] From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"The soldiers of the Old and Middle Kingdom wore no armour. In the Old Kingdom they are usually depicted wearing only a belt and a small triangular loincloth, and by the Middle Kingdom their costume was invariably the same short linen kilt as that worn by civilian workmen. [...] From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"The soldiers of the Old and Middle Kingdom wore no armour. In the Old Kingdom they are usually depicted wearing only a belt and a small triangular loincloth, and by the Middle Kingdom their costume was invariably the same short linen kilt as that worn by civilian workmen. [...] From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"The soldiers of the Old and Middle Kingdom wore no armour. In the Old Kingdom they are usually depicted wearing only a belt and a small triangular loincloth, and by the Middle Kingdom their costume was invariably the same short linen kilt as that worn by civilian workmen. [...] From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"The soldiers of the Old and Middle Kingdom wore no armour. In the Old Kingdom they are usually depicted wearing only a belt and a small triangular loincloth, and by the Middle Kingdom their costume was invariably the same short linen kilt as that worn by civilian workmen. [...] From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
"The soldiers of the Old and Middle Kingdom wore no armour. In the Old Kingdom they are usually depicted wearing only a belt and a small triangular loincloth, and by the Middle Kingdom their costume was invariably the same short linen kilt as that worn by civilian workmen. [...] From the late Predynastic Period to the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian soldiers’ only bodily protection (apart from the occasional use of a band of webbing across the shoulders and chest) was supplied by long, roughly rectangular shields made of cowhide stretched over a wooden frame."
[1]
[1]: (Shaw 1991: 32) Shaw, Ian. 1991. Egyptian Warfare and Weapons. Princes Risborough: Shire. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/7J8H86XF. |
||||||
|
based on Cairan armour, which was probably the most advanced at the time
[1]
"the Egyptians had been using bronze armor since the Eighteenth dynasty, ’but it consisted of nothing more elaborate than metal scales sewn onto a leather base."
[2]
[1]: (Manning 2015, Personal Communication) [2]: (Fischer-Bovet 2014, 20) |
||||||
|
“Captains and wealthier nobles might have three-quarter armour, consisting of a closed helmet, curiass (breastplate), arm defences, and leg defences that ended at the knees. Those of lesser means made do with a helmet and some form of leather or cotton armour. In time, however, the Spanish began to favour the native-style quilted cotton armour, which was far more comfortable to wear in the humid climate of the New World.”
[1]
[1]: (Pemberton 2011, preview) Pemberton, John. 2011. Conquistadors: Searching for El Dorado: The Terrifying Spanish Conquest of the Aztec and Inca Empires. Canary Press eBooks Limited. https://www.zotero.org/groups/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/3SI549GS |
||||||
|
Not mentioned in the literature. This is interpreted as evidence of absence because this is a culture of low complexity for warfare technology.
|
||||||
|
"Bell-Beakers are usually found with other weapons: daggers, and archery equipment such as triangular barbed-flint arrowheads and wristguards of fine stone. The first users of Bell-Beakers did not practice metallurgy, and the earliest daggers were made of flint; though they soon came to be cast in copper, and then bronze. This martial image was perhaps completed by leather jerkins and later by woven fabrics, held by a belt with an ornamental bone ring to secure it; such figures are schematically represented on the later statue menhirs of the west Alpine region."
[1]
[1]: (Sherratt in Cunliffe 1994, 251) |
||||||
|
"These negatives came to outweigh suit armor’s protective quality ... Instead, cloth or leather garments were worn and smaller, fleeter steeds were newly desired: the fully armed knight and the destrier retired from war together".
[1]
[1]: (Nolan 2006, 25) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Medieval armour was much like that worn by Germanic warriors in 100 CE still consisting of a shield, helmet and coat (usually mail).
[1]
From 1150 CE a surcoat "generally sleeveless cloth coat probably borrowed from the Muslims - over the coat of mail."
[1]
[1]: (Boulton 1995 67-68) Jonathan D Boulton. Armor And Weapons. William W Kibler. Grover A Zinn. Lawrence Earp. John Bell Henneman Jr. 1995. Routledge Revivals: Medieval France (1995): An Encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon. |
||||||
|
Medieval armour was much like that worn by Germanic warriors in 100 CE still consisting of a shield, helmet and coat (usually mail).
[1]
From 1150 CE a surcoat "generally sleeveless cloth coat probably borrowed from the Muslims - over the coat of mail."
[1]
Early 13th century Brabancon mercenaries often wore leather, quilted armour.
[2]
Whalebone, horn, boiled leather used as plate.
[1]
[1]: (Boulton 1995 67-68) Jonathan D Boulton. Armor And Weapons. William W Kibler. Grover A Zinn. Lawrence Earp. John Bell Henneman Jr. 1995. Routledge Revivals: Medieval France (1995): An Encyclopedia. Routledge. Abingdon. [2]: (Nicolle 1991, 10) |
||||||
|
Early 13th century Brabancon mercenaries often wore leather, quilted armour.
[1]
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: typical French knight wore "plate armor for shoulders and limbs topped by a bascinet, a metal helmet with projecting hinged visors and air holes. Instead of the surcoat, they wore a shorter leather jupon, and their warhorses were also armored, with plate covering their heads and mail or leather their flanks."
[2]
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: full metal armour worn over padded doublet.
[2]
[1]: (Nicolle 1991, 10) David Nicolle. 2000. French Armies Of The Hundred Years War. Osprey Publishing. Oxford. [2]: (Wagner 2006, 27-29) John A Wagner. 2006. Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: typical French knight wore "plate armor for shoulders and limbs topped by a bascinet, a metal helmet with projecting hinged visors and air holes. Instead of the surcoat, they wore a shorter leather jupon, and their warhorses were also armored, with plate covering their heads and mail or leather their flanks."
[1]
Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453 CE) reference: full metal armour worn over padded doublet.
[1]
[1]: (Wagner 2006, 27-29) John A Wagner. 2006. Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Sarbah reports leather helmets: "Ansa the king appeared in full state, accompanied by a large retinue. Before him went his men sounding trumpets and horns, carrying tinkling bells, and playing various kinds of drums, as well as other instruments, which were quite new to the Portuguese. His Gyasi men, that is, bodyguard, were armed with spears, javelins, shields, bows and arrows; on their heads they wore a sort of helmet made of skins thickly studded with shark’s teeth, the same kind of helmets one sees whenever a town company turns out in fighting attire, and as they came with their lord and master, they sang their popular martial airs. The subordinate rulers wore chains of gold and other ornaments, and each of them was attended by two pages, one carrying his master’s shield and arms, and the other a little round stool for him to sit on."
[1]
Shields were made from leather: "Their targets be made of such pits as their cloth is made of, and very closely wrought, and they be in form four square and very great, and somewhat longer than they be broad, so that kneeling down, they make their targets to cover their whole body. Their bows be short and of a pretty strength, as much as a man is able to draw with one of his fingers, and the string is of the bark of a tree, made flat, and almost a quarter of an inch broad. As for their arrows, I have not yet seen any of them, for they had wrapped them up close, and because I was busy I could not stand about it, to have them open them. Their gold also they work very well."
[2]
[1]: Sarbah, John Mensah 1968. “Fanti National Constitution: A Short Treatise On The Constitution And Government Of The Fanti, Asanti, And Other Akan Tribes Of West Africa Together With A Brief Account Of The Discovery Of The Gold Coast By Portuguese Navigators, A Short Narration Of Early English Voyages, And A Study Of The Rise Of British Gold Coast Jurisdiction, Etc., Etc.”, 57 [2]: Sarbah, John Mensah 1968. “Fanti National Constitution: A Short Treatise On The Constitution And Government Of The Fanti, Asanti, And Other Akan Tribes Of West Africa Together With A Brief Account Of The Discovery Of The Gold Coast By Portuguese Navigators, A Short Narration Of Early English Voyages, And A Study Of The Rise Of British Gold Coast Jurisdiction, Etc., Etc.”, 67 |
||||||
|
"They have previously dressed themselves as for the war-path, with fine jackets of woven cloth and coats of bearskin, or leopard cat... Once the cotton has been harvested, and the pods dried in the sun (this is allegorical of the smoking of trophy heads), it is spun into thread ( ubong ). This is then woven into war-jackets, or baju."
[1]
[1]: Davison & Sutlive 1991, 188-190 |
||||||
|
They have previously dressed themselves as for the war-path, with fine jackets of woven cloth and coats of bearskin, or leopard cat... Once the cotton has been harvested, and the pods dried in the sun (this is allegorical of the smoking of trophy heads), it is spun into thread ( ubong ). This is then woven into war-jackets, or baju.
[1]
[1]: Davison & Sutlive 1991, 188-190 |
||||||
|
Helmets had flaps made of leather. Some Mongol armour was made of hide, which "consisted of six layers tightly sewn together and shaped, after being softened by boiling,to fit the body."
[1]
[1]: Martin, H. Desmond. “The Mongol Army.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, no. 1 (April 1, 1943): 52-53. |
||||||
|
The Borobudur reliefs depict armour but do not specify which kinds.
[1]
Old Mataram was a ’highly Indianized culture’ until it was replaced by an East Javanese one "that increasingly promoted various elements of the island’s older indigenous traditions."
[2]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese include ’armour, shield, helmet’.
[3]
[1]: (Draeger 1972, 23) D F Draeger. 1972. Weapons and Fighting Arts of Indonesia. Tuttle Publishing. [2]: (Unesco 2005, 233) Unesco. 2005. The Restoration of Borobudur. Unesco. [3]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
"After the formation of the Majapahit Dynasty, however, weapons and warfare underwent significant changes. The military dress completely evolved from the Indian to the East Javanese fashion."
[1]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese include ’armour, shield, helmet’.
[2]
The Borobudur reliefs depicted armour but do not specify which kinds.
[3]
[1]: (Powell 2002, 325) John Powell. 2002. Weapons & Warfare: Ancient and medieval weapons and warfare (to 1500). Salem Press. [2]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. [3]: (Draeger 1972, 23) D F Draeger. 1972. Weapons and Fighting Arts of Indonesia. Tuttle Publishing. |
||||||
|
Based on the fact that the Borobudur reliefs depict armour but do not specify which kinds - these were the types used later.
[1]
Old Mataram was a ’highly Indianized culture’ until it was replaced by an East Javanese one "that increasingly promoted various elements of the island’s older indigenous traditions."
[2]
Indian military terms surviving in Javanese include ’armour, shield, helmet’.
[3]
[1]: (Draeger 1972, 23) [2]: (Unesco 2005, 233) Unesco. 2005. The Restoration of Borobudur. Unesco. [3]: (Kumara 2007, 161) Sasiprabha Kumara. 2007. Sanskrit Across Cultures. Special Centre for Sanskrit Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
Raw hide was used on shields.
[1]
Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions armour made from iron, skins, hoofs and horns.(Book II, The Duties of Government Superintendents"). Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions a head covering called sirastrana but not the material it was made from (Book II, The Duties of Government Superintendents").
[1]: (Egerton 2002, 13) Wilbraham Egerton. 2002 (1880). Indian and Oriental Arms and Armour. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola. |
||||||
|
A military historian states that helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[1]
[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
According to a military historian helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian historians agree? According to a military historian the Mauryans carried shields made of raw oxhide stretched over a wood or wicker frame
[2]
- do Mauryan specialists agree? Soldiers of the Vijayanagara c1400 CE used iron plates inside raw leather tunics and headpieces similar to helmets.
[3]
It’s possible that leather tunics was a military technology with ancient roots. According to a military historian: "In India, protective body armor was in use around 1600 B.C.E. The Vedic Epics use the word varman to describe what was probably a coat of mail, probably a leather garment or coat reinforced with brass plates at critical points."
[4]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree with this?
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [3]: (Domingos Paes [c1520] 1991, 276) Domingos Paes (c1520-1522). Of the things which I saw and contrived to learn concerning the Kingdom of Narsimga, etc. The Vijayanagar Empire: Chronicales of Paes and Nuniz. Asian Educational Services. New Delhi. [4]: (Gabriel 2007, 79) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[1]
[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
A military historian states that helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree? A military historian states that the Mauryans carried shields made of raw oxhide stretched over a wood or wicker frame
[2]
- do Mauryan specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor and a leather shield.
[3]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [3]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
"Protection against weapons was still generally made of leather or thick felt, although the later second millennium saw growing use among those who could afford it of body armor made of overlapping copper or bronze platelets sewn onto the leather. It became more common in the first millennium, now made with iron rather than bronze scales."
[1]
[1]: (McIntosh 2005: 190) McIntosh, J. 2005. Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspective. Santa Barbara: ABC Clio. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KK2E3KMD. |
||||||
|
NB: The following refers to a different era and place. Reference for Vedic-period India (mostly Ganges valley but may also be relevant further south): "No material evidence exists to prove the use of body-armour, helmets and shields by the people of the Indus valley. It has been suggested, however, that domed pieces of copper, each pierced by two holes, were stitched on to a piece of cloth and used as a coat of mail. And a few pictographs of the Indus script may represent men holding shields."
[1]
By the time of Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, there is mention of "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor and a leather shield.
[2]
According to a military historian: "In India, protective body armor was in use around 1600 B.C.E. The Vedic Epics use the word varman to describe what was probably a coat of mail, probably a leather garment or coat reinforced with brass plates at critical points."
[3]
- do Indian specialists agree with this statement?
[1]: (Singh 1997, 91) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997 (1965). Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited. Delhi. [2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Gabriel 2007, 79) Richard A Gabriel. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Ancient World. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Shields were made of bark or leather: ‘The walls and ceiling are hung with the family’s possessions - baskets, tools, cooking and eating utensils - and two or three bamboo poles suspended from ropes serve as racks to hold the family’s spare clothes and blankets when these are not in use. Pots containing threshed rice and other staples line one wall to the front, and pots of brewing rice beer stand at the back. Several low stools may be arranged around the wall, pushed out of the way when not in use. At least one old headhunting mil’am (sword) is stuck into the back wall of every house, and one or more shields may lean against the wall below the sword.’
[1]
‘The Garos have two kinds of shield. The sepi is made entirely of wood, or of flat lengths of wood bound together and covered with very thin strips of cane or bamboo, while the danil is made of bearskin or cowhide stretched on a wooden frame. Both kinds are of the same shape and size. They are about 3 feet long by 18 inches broad, roughly oblong, but with slightly concave sides, and with a gentle curve backwards over the hand. They are fitted with handles made of cane.’
[2]
[1]: Marak, Llewellyn R. 1995. “Arts, Architecture And Wood Carving”, 138 [2]: Playfair, Alan 1909. “Garos”, 32 |
||||||
|
Harsha’s army 7th century CE: "Bana describes the cavaliers as dressed in tunics, waistband and trousers. At that time, the Indians knew how to make garments from flax, linen, cotton and silk."
[1]
Gurjara-Pratihara (slightly earlier polity) in the Yasastilaka champu described as having daggers, "dhotis coming up to the knees", and carried quivers.
[2]
’
[1]: (Roy 2012, 134) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi. |
||||||
|
"The Guptas imitated the dress, equipment and the techniques of warfare as practised by the Central Asian nomads."
[1]
In Central Asia the 5th-6th CE Hephthalites used shields made of leather.
[2]
[1]: (Roy 2016, 22) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon. [2]: Karasulas, Antony. Mounted archers of the steppe 600 BC-AD 1300. Vol. 120. Osprey Publishing, 2004, p.29. |
||||||
|
According to a military historian, thick turbans could be used to protect heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree and does it apply to this polity? According to Kamandaka’s Nitisara c650 CE elephants were equipped with leather armour.
[2]
There is no scholarly agreement on the date of Kamandaka’s Nitisara (an advice for rulers genre text) which is "the principal source for understanding the norms and techniques of warfare in north India". It is dated by different scholars to between 400-550 CE, 500-700 CE, or as late as 800 CE. Kaushik Roy suggests the post-Harsha period.
[3]
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[4]
Harsha’s army 7th century CE: "Bana describes the cavaliers as dressed in tunics, waistband and trousers. At that time, the Indians knew how to make garments from flax, linen, cotton and silk."
[5]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Roy 2013, 29) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London. [3]: (Roy 2012, 137) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [4]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (Roy 2012, 134) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. |
||||||
|
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[1]
[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
"Protection against weapons was still generally made of leather or thick felt, although the later second millennium saw growing use among those who could afford it of body armor made of overlapping copper or bronze platelets sewn onto the leather. It became more common in the first millennium, now made with iron rather than bronze scales."
[1]
[1]: (McIntosh 2005: 190) McIntosh, J. 2005. Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspective. Santa Barbara: ABC Clio. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KK2E3KMD. |
||||||
|
According to a military historian, thick turbans could be used to protect heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree and does it apply to this polity? According to Kamandaka’s Nitisara c650 CE elephants were equipped with leather armour.
[2]
There is no scholarly agreement on the date of Kamandaka’s Nitisara (an advice for rulers genre text) which is "the principal source for understanding the norms and techniques of warfare in north India". It is dated by different scholars to between 400-550 CE, 500-700 CE, or as late as 800 CE. Kaushik Roy suggests the post-Harsha period.
[3]
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[4]
Harsha’s army 7th century CE: "Bana describes the cavaliers as dressed in tunics, waistband and trousers. At that time, the Indians knew how to make garments from flax, linen, cotton and silk."
[5]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Roy 2013, 29) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London. [3]: (Roy 2012, 137) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. [4]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (Roy 2012, 134) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. |
||||||
|
According to a military historian (this needs confirmation from a Mauryan specialist) infantry carried long narrow shield made from raw oxhide over a wooden or wicker frame.
[1]
Ox-hide rather than cow leather for religious reasons.
[2]
Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions armour made from iron, skins, hoofs and horns.(Book II, The Duties of Government Superintendents"). Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions a head covering called sirastrana but not the material it was made from (Book II, The Duties of Government Superintendents"). Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions coats extending to the knees, one which reached the floor, and another without arm covering (Book II, The Duties of Government Superintendents").
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: Gabriel, Richard A. The great armies of antiquity. p. 218-220 |
||||||
|
Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor.
[1]
[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
A military historian suggests helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree? A military historian suggests the Maurayans carried shields made of raw oxhide stretched over a wood or wicker frame
[2]
- do Mauryan specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor and a leather shield.
[3]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [3]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): Mauryan infantry used a long narrow shield of raw oxhide over a wooden or wicker frame.
[1]
Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity .
[2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon. |
||||||
|
A military historian states helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads
[1]
- do ancient Indian specialists agree? Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions "dense structures made of the skin, hooves, and horns/tusks of the river dolphin, rhinocerous, Dhenuka, and cattle" used as armor and a leather shield.
[2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group. [2]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
Helmets had flaps made of leather. Some Mongol armour was made of hide, which "consisted of six layers tightly sewn together and shaped, after being softened by boiling,to fit the body."
[1]
[1]: Martin, H. Desmond. “The Mongol Army.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, no. 1 (April 1, 1943): 52-53. |
||||||
|
’Japanese armorers did not confine themselves to metal, and instead incorporated lighter and ore malleable materials such as leather and silk (or other fibers) along with iron or steel parts.’
[1]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.169. |
||||||
|
"But, while engaged in fighting they put on a kind of armour made of leather, which covered their body completely, leaving only the face and the feet."
[1]
According to Nuniz, soldiers of Vijayanagar ’were all armed each after his own fashion, the archers and musketeers with their quilted tunics, and shield-men with swords and poignards in their girdles. Their shields are so large that there is no need for armour to protect the body, which is completely covered. Their horses were in full clothing. The men wore doublets, and had weapons in their hands. And on their heads were headpieces after the manner of their doublets, quilted with cotton.’
[2]
Razzak says soldiers in Kerala had a dagger and a cowhide shield.
[2]
[1]: (Ramayanna 1986, pp. 126-127) [2]: (Eraly 2015) Abraham Eraly. 2015. The Age of Wrath: A History of the Delhi Sultanate. Penguin. |
||||||
|
"Protection against weapons was still generally made of leather or thick felt, although the later second millennium saw growing use among those who could afford it of body armor made of overlapping copper or bronze platelets sewn onto the leather. It became more common in the first millennium, now made with iron rather than bronze scales."
[1]
[1]: (McIntosh 2005: 190) McIntosh, J. 2005. Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspective. Santa Barbara: ABC Clio. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KK2E3KMD. |
||||||
|
"Many of the early Persian miniatures, particularly those under Mongol influence of the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, seldom illustrate shields. When they do the shields would seem to be of stout hide—small, circular, and convex, with applied metal bosses."
[1]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. |
||||||
|
"Protection against weapons was still generally made of leather or thick felt, although the later second millennium saw growing use among those who could afford it of body armor made of overlapping copper or bronze platelets sewn onto the leather. It became more common in the first millennium, now made with iron rather than bronze scales."
[1]
[1]: (McIntosh 2005: 190) McIntosh, J. 2005. Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspective. Santa Barbara: ABC Clio. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/KK2E3KMD. |
||||||
|
Heavy clothing. Poorer ranks used leather or cloth.
[1]
"knee-high, leather jackboot with thick leather soles complete with hobbed nails to improve traction. The boot had thin plates of iron sewn into the front to provide shin protection."
[2]
[1]: (Chadwick 2005, 77) [2]: (Gabriel 2002, 10) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
According to one military historian (data needs to be checked by an expert for this polity) cavalry carried a small oval shield made of leather with a metal rim.
[1]
According to one military historian (data needs to be checked by an expert for this polity) cavalry wore leather greaves to protect the legs.
[1]
According to one military historian (data needs to be checked by an expert for this polity) body armour of cavalryman could include a "leather coat covered with overlapping disks of bronze, iron, and sometimes gold."
[1]
Archaemenid cavalry wore scale armour but may also have worn linen armour of the Greek style.
[2]
According to one military historian (data needs to be checked by an expert for this polity) heavy infantry wore black hoods in close combat though this does not seem to be armour.
[3]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 162) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. [2]: (Farrokh 2007, 77) Farrokh, K. 2007. Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War. Osprey Publishing. [3]: (Gabriel 2002, 163) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport. |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
"In the seventh century the Arab Caliphate overran the Sāssānian Empire and, as far as we can tell, no great changes took place in the Persian equipment then or for a long time afterwards."
[1]
Used for shields by the preceding Abbasids
[2]
and the Buyids used shields.
[3]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. [2]: Kennedy, the Armies of the Caliphs pp. 168-178 [3]: Busse, H. 1975. Iran under the Būyids. In Frye, R. N. (ed.) The Cambridge History of Iran. Volume 4. The period from the Arab Invasion to the Saljuq’s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p.251 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured. Long garments and kilts mentioned possibly in reference to soldiers for Iron Age Elam.
[1]
[1]: Javier Alvarez-Mon, ‘Elam in the Iron Age’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 466 |
||||||
|
"The Persian royal horses are caparisoned, each one bearing rows of badges or symbols. Such trappers could have been of leather or quilted fabric with the devices applied in precious metals."
[1]
Plutarch on the Parthians at Carrhae: "tough breastplates of raw hide or steel".
[2]
Heavy cavalry armour made from "rawhide, horn, iron, and bronze cut into scales. Some horse-trappers were of thick felt".
[3]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. [2]: (Ellis 2004, 38) Ellis, John. 2004. Cavalry: History of Mounted Warfare. Pen and Sword. [3]: (Penrose 2008, 223) Penrose, Jane. 2008. Rome and Her Enemies: An Empire Created and Destroyed by War. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
"The Persian royal horses are caparisoned, each one bearing rows of badges or symbols. Such trappers could have been of leather or quilted fabric with the devices applied in precious metals."
[1]
Plutarch on the Parthians at Carrhae: "tough breastplates of raw hide or steel".
[2]
Heavy cavalry armour made from "rawhide, horn, iron, and bronze cut into scales. Some horse-trappers were of thick felt".
[3]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. [2]: (Ellis 2004, 38) Ellis, John. 2004. Cavalry: History of Mounted Warfare. Pen and Sword. [3]: (Penrose 2008, 223) Penrose, Jane. 2008. Rome and Her Enemies: An Empire Created and Destroyed by War. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
"Cuirass (char-a’ina). Iran, Qajar period, early 19th century. Steel, gold, and textile."
[1]
[1]: (Phyrr 2015, 6) Stuart W Phyrr. 2015. American Collectors and the Formation of the Metropolitan Museum’s Collection of Islamic Arms and Armor. David G Alexander. ed. Islamic Arms and Armor in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Metropolitan Museum of Art. Yale University Press. New Haven. |
||||||
|
The qizilbdsh troops "wore light armour".
[1]
Leather face and neck protectors.
[2]
Wool and silk Khaftan and Shalvar-e Khaftan (gambeson and gambeson pants). Balatane-ye namadi (felt jacket).
[2]
[1]: Savory, R. M. “The Sherley Myth.” Iran 5, 1967: 75 [2]: (Khorasani 2014) Moshtagh Khorasani, Manouchehr. 2014. Reproduction of an Early Safavid Armor. https://www.academia.edu/8815598/Moshtagh_Khorasani_Manouchehr_2014_._Reproduction_of_an_Early_Safavid_Armor |
||||||
|
"The dearth of illustrative material for the greater part of six centuries is largely due to the wanton destruction caused by two savage invasions from the east and only such finds as the stucco figures from Kara-shar [Central Asian warrior, eighth to tenth century] tell us that in all this period there had been little change."
[1]
"... a fragment of a leather-covered circular wooden shield has survived, bearing a painting of a mounted warrior. This was found in the ruins of the castle of Mug, east of Samarkand, and with it were many documents dating the destruction of the place to the eighth century - when the Persian prince who held it rebelled against the local Arab ruler."
[1]
"Many of the early Persian miniatures, particularly those under Mongol influence of the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, seldom illustrate shields. When they do the shields would seem to be of stout hide - small, circular, and convex, with applied metal bosses."
[1]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. |
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
Almost certainly could be coded present if there is evidence the polity used the shield. At this time it is unlikely the warriors went into battle completely unarmoured.
|
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
There is evidence for loincloths being used, but it would hardly count as armor and there is no evidence for warfare at this time:‘The early periods at Tepe Sialk (I-IV) were a time of important technological innovation. A carved bone knife handle representing a man wearing a cap and a loincloth found in a Sialk I context is one of the earliest known anthropomorphic representations from Iran’
[1]
[1]: Ali Mousavi, ’The History of Archaeological Research in Iran: A Brief Survey’, In Daniel T. Potts (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Iran, 2013, p. 7 |
||||||
|
On the basis of armour worn by French soldiers of the 12th-13th centuries we would expect helmet and shield, leather and quilted armour as well as metal breastplate, limb protection and chainmail.
[1]
[2]
[1]: Boulton in Kilber, W W. 1995. Medieval France: An Encyclopedia. Psychology Press. [2]: Nicolle, D and McBride, A. 1991. French Medieval Armies 1000-1300. Osprey Publishing Ltd. London. |
||||||
|
Early 13th century Brabancon mercenaries often wore leather, quilted armour.
[1]
General reference for this time period in Europe: cuir-bouillio armour was made by boiling leather in wax.
[2]
General reference for this time period in Europe: all types of armour were worn with padding e.g. the aketon quilted tunic, which were reasonably functional armour in their own right.
[2]
[1]: (Nicolle 1991, 10) [2]: (Rogers 2007, 31) Clifford J Rogers. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Middle Ages. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
General reference for this time period in Europe: cuir-bouillio armour was made by boiling leather in wax.
[1]
General reference for this time period in Europe: all types of armour were worn with padding e.g. the aketon quilted tunic, which were reasonably functional armour in their own right.
[1]
[1]: (Rogers 2007, 31) Clifford J Rogers. 2007. Soldiers’ Lives Through History: The Middle Ages. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Shields: "the written evidence of Polybius, and a Republican example found in Egypt, suggests they were made of plywood laminated with leather and canvas, bound together at the edges with iron or bronze."
[1]
Felt materials: subarmales "padded garments normally worn under armour."
[1]
[1]: (Pollard and Berry 2012, 43) |
||||||
|
Leather lined shields. Linen and composite corselet armour.
[1]
"Hoplite panoplies have been discovered in the so-called Tomb of the Warrior at Vulci, dating to c. 530 B.C., as well as in a tomb at Lanuvium in Latium dating to the early fifth century" (citing Torelli 1989 and Drummond).
[2]
[1]: (Fields 2011) [2]: (Forsythe 2006, 114) Forsythe, Gary. 2006. A Critical History of Early Rome: From Prehistory to the First Punic War. University of California Press. |
||||||
|
‘Japanese armorers did not confine themselves to metal, and instead incorporated lighter and more malleable materials such as leather and silk (or other fibers) along with iron or steel parts.’
[1]
‘The preferred type of leather was cowhide, and the preferred part of the hide was the animal’s back, as this was the thickest. But because it was uneconomical to waste the rest of the hide, craftsmen also made sane from the belly leather, which was thinner and softer. This meant that the lamellae in most armors were of uneven.’
[2]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.169. [2]: Friday, Karl F. 2004. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Psychology Press.p.90. |
||||||
|
General reference for medieval warfare: Mail armour was normally worn with "everday garments or special, padded clothes that helped to cushion heavy blows and provide additional protection."
[1]
General reference for medieval warfare: "Alongside the use of mail armor, various quilted textile defenses were also worn from the second half of the twelfth century - the pourpoint, the aketon, and the gambeson".
[2]
General reference for medieval warfare: "Though later always made from iron, early plate defenses could also be made from hardened leather called cuir boulli."
[3]
General reference for medieval warfare: "The increasing use of gunpowder weapons as well as changes in tactics and the increasing sizes of armies led to the demise of armor in the seventeeth century."
[4]
Illustration shows horse armour which includes non-metallic (quilting, leather?) and metallic (plate) elements.
[5]
[1]: (Smith 2010, 68) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (Smith 2010, 69) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Smith 2010, 70) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [4]: (Smith 2010, 73) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (Nicolle 1989, Plate C) David Nicolle. 1989. The Venetian Empire 1200-1670. Osprey Publishing. Oxford. |
||||||
|
’From all this, we can bear in mind that Khmer breastplates, as we have described them, possibly used the materials cited by Bezacier: buffalo skins, tree bark, and bronze, even if this metal was replaced with iron at the period we are discussing, if indeed metal was used in making this armour. This was the case of the king, if we can believe Zhou Daguan, who in the thirteenth century AD indicates that the sovereign "had his body class in iron, so that even knives and arrows, striking his body, could not harm him".’
[1]
[1]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, pp. 20-21) |
||||||
|
General reference for medieval warfare: Mail armour was normally worn with "everday garments or special, padded clothes that helped to cushion heavy blows and provide additional protection."
[1]
General reference for medieval warfare: "Alongside the use of mail armor, various quilted textile defenses were also worn from the second half of the twelfth century - the pourpoint, the aketon, and the gambeson".
[2]
General reference for medieval warfare: "Though later always made from iron, early plate defenses could also be made from hardened leather called cuir boulli."
[3]
General reference for medieval warfare: "The increasing use of gunpowder weapons as well as changes in tactics and the increasing sizes of armies led to the demise of armor in the seventeeth century."
[4]
Illustration shows horse armour which includes non-metallic (quilting, leather?) and metallic (plate) elements.
[5]
[1]: (Smith 2010, 68) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (Smith 2010, 69) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (Smith 2010, 70) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [4]: (Smith 2010, 73) Robert Douglas Smith. Armor, Body. Clifford J. Rogers. ed. 2010. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [5]: (Nicolle 1989, Plate C) David Nicolle. 1989. The Venetian Empire 1200-1670. Osprey Publishing. Oxford. |
||||||
|
‘Japanese armorers did not confine themselves to metal, and instead incorporated lighter and more malleable materials such as leather and silk (or other fibers) along with iron or steel parts.’
[1]
‘The preferred type of leather was cowhide, and the preferred part of the hide was the animal’s back, as this was the thickest. But because it was uneconomical to waste the rest of the hide, craftsmen also made sane from the belly leather, which was thinner and softer. This meant that the lamellae in most armors were of uneven.’
[2]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.169. [2]: Friday, Karl F. 2004. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Psychology Press.p.90. |
||||||
|
‘Japanese armorers did not confine themselves to metal, and instead incorporated lighter and more malleable materials such as leather and silk (or other fibers) along with iron or steel parts.’
[1]
‘The preferred type of leather was cowhide, and the preferred part of the hide was the animal’s back, as this was the thickest. But because it was uneconomical to waste the rest of the hide, craftsmen also made sane from the belly leather, which was thinner and softer. This meant that the lamellae in most armors were of uneven.’
[2]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.169. [2]: Friday, Karl F. 2004. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Psychology Press.p.90. |
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
No archaeological evidence for this. Moreover, the scholarly consensus is that the Jomon were relatively peaceful.
|
||||||
|
‘Japanese armorers did not confine themselves to metal, and instead incorporated lighter and more malleable materials such as leather and silk (or other fibers) along with iron or steel parts.’
[1]
‘The preferred type of leather was cowhide, and the preferred part of the hide was the animal’s back, as this was the thickest. But because it was uneconomical to waste the rest of the hide, craftsmen also made sane from the belly leather, which was thinner and softer. This meant that the lamellae in most armors were of uneven.’
[2]
[1]: Deal, William E. 2005. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Oxford University Press.p.169. [2]: Friday, Karl F. 2004. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. Psychology Press.p.90. |
||||||
|
"The earliest armor used in Japan, as elsewhere, was padded or made of scales or rings sewn on cloth."
[1]
[2]
[1]: (Stone 1999, 60-61) George Cameron Stone. 1999. Glossary of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor in All Countries and in All Times. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola. [2]: Kidder Jr., J. Edward, 2007. Himiko and Japan’s Elusive Kingdom of Yamatai (Honolulu: Hawaii University Press). p. 81 |
||||||
|
’From all this, we can bear in mind that Khmer breastplates, as we have described them, possibly used the materials cited by Bezacier: buffalo skins, tree bark, and bronze, even if this metal was replaced with iron at the period we are discussing, if indeed metal was used in making this armour. This was the case of the king, if we can believe Zhou Daguan, who in the thirteenth century AD indicates that the sovereign "had his body class in iron, so that even knives and arrows, striking his body, could not harm him".’
[1]
[1]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, pp. 20-21) |
||||||
|
’From all this, we can bear in mind that Khmer breastplates, as we have described them, possibly used the materials cited by Bezacier: buffalo skins, tree bark, and bronze, even if this metal was replaced with iron at the period we are discussing, if indeed metal was used in making this armour. This was the case of the king, if we can believe Zhou Daguan, who in the thirteenth century AD indicates that the sovereign "had his body class in iron, so that even knives and arrows, striking his body, could not harm him".’
[1]
[1]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, pp. 20-21) |
||||||
|
’From all this, we can bear in mind that Khmer breastplates, as we have described them, possibly used the materials cited by Bezacier: buffalo skins, tree bark, and bronze, even if this metal was replaced with iron at the period we are discussing, if indeed metal was used in making this armour. This was the case of the king, if we can believe Zhou Daguan, who in the thirteenth century AD indicates that the sovereign "had his body class in iron, so that even knives and arrows, striking his body, could not harm him".’
[1]
[1]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h and Smithies 2007, pp. 20-21) |
||||||
|
Zhou Daguan mentions that in the 13th century the Angkorians did not use the hide of cow to make items,
[1]
which may be connected to religious ideas. If that is so, it is likely that leather items were not produced as far back as Funan, when the Indian religions were introduced. Cloth, on the other hand, is used by the Angkorian infantry in the bas-reliefs.
[2]
[1]: (Zhou Daguan 2007, p. 73) [2]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, p. 88) |
||||||
|
Zhou Daguan mentions that in the 13th century the Angkorians did not use the hide of cow to make items,
[1]
which may be connected to religious ideas. If that is so, it is likely that leather items were not produced as far back as Funan, when the Indian religions were introduced. Cloth, on the other hand, is used by the Angkorian infantry in the bas-reliefs.
[2]
[1]: (Zhou Daguan 2007, p. 73) [2]: (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2007, p. 88) |
||||||
|
Vedic sources mention charioteer warrior gods with helmet of bull skin or metal.
[1]
Judging from contemporary texts from Mesopotamia chariot warriors (currently not confirmed by archaeology) typically required "leather coats of mail (sometimes with bronze) for horses".
[2]
[1]: (Kuz’mina 2007, 137) Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina. 2007. The Origin of the Indo-Iranians. J P Mallory ed. BRILL. Leiden. [2]: (Kuz’mina 2007, 136) Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina. 2007. The Origin of the Indo-Iranians. J P Mallory ed. BRILL. Leiden. |
||||||
|
Present in Egypt at this time - the regime in the Morocco probably used weapons similar to those of its neighbours. We could also check - as yet unconsulted - references for Christians in contemporary Iberia who may have been used as mercenaries.
|
||||||
|
"Armour was apparently little used in the Western Sudan, though the Mossi cavalry for protective purposes assumed as much clothing as possible and provided leather and copper shields for the vulnerable parts of their mounts."
[1]
"In the late sixteenth century the Wolof cavalry were described as wearing a form of armour made from twisted cotton cloth which was resistant to arrows and spear thrusts."
[1]
Padded clothing.
[2]
[1]: (Smith 1989, 78) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [2]: (Smith 1989, 64) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
"The Tuaregs wore puffed trousers, a tunic, a turban, and a litham."
[1]
1000-1650 CE period: "body armor was rare. Among the cavalry empires of the Sahel and sudan, quilted horse and body armor were common but plate was rarely used."
[2]
[1]: (Diop 1987, 118) Diop, Cheikh Anta. Salemson, Harold trans. 1987. Precolonial Black Africa. Lawrence Hill Books. Chicago. [2]: (Nolan 2006, 27) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"Most of the basic Mesoamerican armaments were in existence at this time [Classic period] - atlatls, darts, and spears, we well as clubs (bladed and unbladed), shields, cotton body armor, and unit standards [...] This military organization and technology was carried forward and elaborated on first by Toltecs and then by Aztecs".
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 5) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
"Armour was apparently little used in the Western Sudan, though the Mossi cavalry for protective purposes assumed as much clothing as possible and provided leather and copper shields for the vulnerable parts of their mounts."
[1]
"In the late sixteenth century the Wolof cavalry were described as wearing a form of armour made from twisted cotton cloth which was resistant to arrows and spear thrusts."
[1]
Padded clothing.
[2]
[1]: (Smith 1989, 78) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. [2]: (Smith 1989, 64) Robert Sydney Smith. 1989. Warfare & Diplomacy in Pre-colonial West Africa. Second Edition. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison. |
||||||
|
there were privileged castes of craftsmen which likely included leather-workers.
[1]
"The Tuaregs wore puffed trousers, a tunic, a turban, and a litham."
[2]
1000-1650 CE period: "body armor was rare. Among the cavalry empires of the Sahel and sudan, quilted horse and body armor were common but plate was rarely used."
[3]
[1]: (Roland and Atmore 2001, 69) [2]: (Diop 1987, 118) Diop, Cheikh Anta. Salemson, Harold trans. 1987. Precolonial Black Africa. Lawrence Hill Books. Chicago. [3]: (Nolan 2006, 27) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
The last Yuan emperor Toghon Temur returned to Mongolia and established the capital of his new Mongol state ("which extended from Manchuria to Kyrgystan") at Karakorum. At that time the MilTech codes would be the same as for the preceding Yuan China. Over the next decades the state lost territory and there was civil war at the start of the 15th century although in 1409 CE they still managed to rout a very large invading Ming army. The Ming attacked again but the Mongols were not conquered. Under an Oirat noble called Esen (1440-1455 CE) they invaded China in 1449 CE with 20,000 cavalry and captured the Ming emperor. In 1451 CE Esen overthrew the Mongol Khan but he wasn’t a direct descendent of Genghis Khan and was killed during a 1455 CE rebellion. His rule was followed by minor Khans who ruled a Mongolia in which the Khalkhas were one of three ’left-flank’ tumens (in addition to Chahars and Uriangqais). The state also had ’right-flank’ tumens (Ordos, Tumeds, Yunshebus) and the Oirats of western Mongolia. "These 6 tumens were major administrative units, often called ulus tumens (princedoms), comprising the 40 lesser tumens of the military-administrative type inherited from the Yuan period, each of which was reputedly composed of 10,000 cavalry troops ..."
[1]
The narrative suggests at least for 1400 CE and 1500 CE the army was cavalry based and in continuity with the preceding Yuan. The Yuan Dynasty is coded present for this armour.
[1]: (Ishjamts 2003, 208-211) N Ishjamts. 2003. The Mongols. Chahryar Adle. Irfan Habib. Karl M Baipakov. eds. History Of Civilizations Of Central Asia. Volume V. Development in contrast: from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century. UNESCO Publishing. Paris. |
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time and code has yet to receive an expert check
|
||||||
|
"For body covering they used fur or leather."
[1]
For comparison, here is a description of an early warrior on the Western Steppe: Early Sarmatian (400-200 BCE) from the region of the Don, Volga and Urals (Western Steppe). “Early Sarmatian heavy-armed warrior wore a forged-iron helmet with a nose piece and cheek pieces. Scale armor of leather protected his body. He carried a twig-woven quiver for a bow and sometimes more than 200 arrows, covered with leather and decorated with an umbor, an arms belt with a buckle for crossing the belts; a richly decorated quiver hook; a long spear with a massive head and spike; a short iron akinakes sword; and iron axe. This complete image recalls a picture from a novel featuring medieval western European knights; these Sarmatian ’proto-types,’ however, are 2,000 years older.”
[2]
[1]: (Golden 1992, 60) [2]: (Yablonsky 2010, 142) Leonid Teodorovich Yablonsky. Jan 2010. New Excavations of the Early Nomadic Burial Ground at Filippovka (Southern Ural Region, Russia). American Journal of Archaeology. Vol. 114. No. 1. pp. 129-143. |
||||||
|
"The Tuaregs wore puffed trousers, a tunic, a turban, and a litham."
[1]
1000-1650 CE period: "body armor was rare. Among the cavalry empires of the Sahel and sudan, quilted horse and body armor were common but plate was rarely used."
[2]
[1]: (Diop 1987, 118) Diop, Cheikh Anta. Salemson, Harold trans. 1987. Precolonial Black Africa. Lawrence Hill Books. Chicago. [2]: (Nolan 2006, 27) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"The Tuaregs wore puffed trousers, a tunic, a turban, and a litham."
[1]
1000-1650 CE period: "body armor was rare. Among the cavalry empires of the Sahel and sudan, quilted horse and body armor were common but plate was rarely used."
[2]
[1]: (Diop 1987, 118) Diop, Cheikh Anta. Salemson, Harold trans. 1987. Precolonial Black Africa. Lawrence Hill Books. Chicago. [2]: (Nolan 2006, 27) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"The Tuaregs wore puffed trousers, a tunic, a turban, and a litham."
[1]
1000-1650 CE period: "body armor was rare. Among the cavalry empires of the Sahel and sudan, quilted horse and body armor were common but plate was rarely used."
[2]
[1]: (Diop 1987, 118) Diop, Cheikh Anta. Salemson, Harold trans. 1987. Precolonial Black Africa. Lawrence Hill Books. Chicago. [2]: (Nolan 2006, 27) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
"The Tuaregs wore puffed trousers, a tunic, a turban, and a litham."
[1]
1000-1650 CE period: "body armor was rare. Among the cavalry empires of the Sahel and sudan, quilted horse and body armor were common but plate was rarely used."
[2]
[1]: (Diop 1987, 118) Diop, Cheikh Anta. Salemson, Harold trans. 1987. Precolonial Black Africa. Lawrence Hill Books. Chicago. [2]: (Nolan 2006, 27) Cathal J Nolan. 2006. The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Volume 1 A - K. Greenwood Press. Westport. |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
"Made of quilted cotton, this armor was as much as two or three inches thick and found in two basic types at Teotihuacan: one covered the entire body and limbs like mail".
[1]
[1]: (Hassig 1992: 82) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/E9VHCKDG. |
||||||
|
Sources
[1]
only mention very little archaeological evidence for military technology for this period, and this does not include armour. However, armour made from wood and cloth have been documented for the later periods, so their absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
Relative to military technology used in this period, sources only mention the atlatl and spears.
[1]
However, armour made from wood and cloth has been documented for the later periods, so its absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
The Oneota are known solely from their material remains
[1]
, and leather and cloth do not tend to survive in the archaeological record.
[1]: (Hall 1997, 142) Hall, Robert L. 1997. An Archaeology of the Soul: North American Indian Belief and Ritual. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/8KH357GV. |
||||||
|
Relative to military technology used in this period, sources only mention the atlatl and spears.
[1]
However, armour made from wood and cloth has been documented for the later periods, so its absence in the archaeological record may be due to preservation bias.
[1]: Marcus and Flannery (1996) Zapotec Civilization: How urban society evolved in Mexico’s Oaxaca Valley. Flannery and Marcus (1983) The Cloud People: divergent evolution of the Zapotec and Mixtec civilizations. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Academic Press, New York. |
||||||
|
Evidence of armor made from organic materials has not been recovered from Mehrgarh.
|
||||||
|
There may be a very tentative link between the presence of rhinoceroses at Nausharo and the use of rhinoceros hides to create shields, but this is based on inference from ethnographic analogy and more evidence is needed to confirm that rhinoceros hide was used in this way
[1]
. There may be no way to directly prove this suggestion as leather is an organic material and is likely to have perished in the archaeological record.
[1]: Possehl, G. L. (1999) Indus Age Beginnings. Oxford and IBH Publishing: New Delhi, Calcutta. p204 |
||||||
|
There may be a very tentative link between the presence of rhinoceroses at Nausharo and the use of rhinoceros hides to create shields, but this is based on inference from ethnographic analogy and more evidence is needed to confirm that rhinoceros hide was used in this way
[1]
. There may be no way to directly prove this suggestion as leather is an organic material and is likely to have perished in the archaeological record.
[1]: Possehl, G. L. (1999) Indus Age Beginnings. Oxford and IBH Publishing: New Delhi, Calcutta. p204 |
||||||
|
"Young people up to a certain age looked after the herds, drove them from one place to another, caught, saddled, and loaded horses. They were called uollar, which means fellows. Among them the older and more skillful ones were called batyr -- knight, khosun -- warrior, and bargan (byargyan’) -- good shot, and roamed through the taiga not far from the settlements, hunting and fishing. Many of them had coats of mail (kuyakh) made from plates of iron and bone sewn over a leather caftan."
[1]
[1]: Sieroszewski, Wacław. 1993. “Yakut: An Experiment In Ethnographic Research.”, 716 |
||||||
|
"Young people up to a certain age looked after the herds, drove them from one place to another, caught, saddled, and loaded horses. They were called uollar, which means fellows. Among them the older and more skillful ones were called batyr -- knight, khosun -- warrior, and bargan (byargyan’) -- good shot, and roamed through the taiga not far from the settlements, hunting and fishing. Many of them had coats of mail (kuyakh) made from plates of iron and bone sewn over a leather caftan."
[1]
[1]: Sieroszewski, Wacław. 1993. “Yakut: An Experiment In Ethnographic Research.”, 716 |
||||||
|
Reconstructing the exact military equipment of armies during the Umayyad Caliphate is problematic as the amount of surviving visual evidence is lacking. As such, sources are primarily literary and focus on notable equipment of unusual rarity or value. In Muslim armies a full equipage was rare and body armour even more so. Coats of mail was available to the Caliphate armies, but only to a small number of elite military members. Besides mail there is some evidence of lamellar leggings and breastplates. Helmets and shields were more widely available. Shields were smaller than their European counterparts and made of leather and wood.
[1]
[1]: (Kennedy 2001, 168-178) |
||||||
|
Preiser-Kapeller says present.
[1]
By 10th century there was "greater use of felt and quilted defences".
[2]
"According to the manuals, the common infantryman wore quilt armour and a turban-like ‘pseudo-helmet’ of felt. (McGeer pp.203-4; illustrations by McBridein Dawson 2007b)."
[3]
"Infantry wore quilted or lamellar body-armour, or mail, although those that could afford the more expensive mail or lamellar equipment may also have possessed horses and been classed among the mounted troops: the evidence suggests that, on the whole, the foot soldiers were less well outfitted than in the late Roman period."
[2]
[1]: (Johannes Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Haldon 2008, 476) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [3]: (O’Rourke 2010, 39) O’Rourke, M. 2010. The Land Forces of the Roman (Byzantine) Empire in the 10th Century. Canberra. |
||||||
|
Preiser-Kapeller says present.
[1]
"The mid-tenth-century heavy cavalryman is described in several sources, in particular the Praecepta militaria ascribed to the emperor Nikephoros II Phokas, and was protected by a lamellar klibaniony with splinted arm-guards, sleeves, and gauntlets, the latter from coarse silk or quilted cotton. From the waist to the knee he wore thick felt coverings, reinforced with mail; over the klibanion was worn a sleeveless quilted or padded coat (the epilorikon); and to protect the head and neck an iron helmet with mail or quilting attached and wrapped around the face. The lower leg was protected by splinted greaves of bronze."
[2]
[1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Haldon 2008, 476-477) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
Preiser-Kapeller says present.
[1]
"light cavalry and infantry continued to be armed, like their Seljuk or Saracen enemies, with the traditional combination of lamellar corselets or mail, quilted fabrics or boiled leather, felt and cotton headgear"
[2]
[1]: (Preiser-Kapeller 2015) Institute for Medieval Research, Division of Byzantine Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences) [2]: (Haldon 2008, 477) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
Inferred, based on presence in the contemporary Pontic kingdom.
[1]
[2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill. [2]: Erciyas, D. B. (2006) Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda under the Hellenistic Kingdom of the Mithradatids. Colloquia Pontica: Brill, Leiden, Boston. |
||||||
|
"In the infantry of the later fifth and sixth centuries ... leg-armour (splinted greaves of either iron or leather or felt)".
[1]
Usual for a "mail shirt [to] be worn, with padded jerkin or coat beneath."
[2]
"The majority of infantry and cavalry were equipped with quilted or padded coats (zabai) reaching to the knee, and protection for the chest of leather, possibly in the form of scale armour. For the infantry, whether or not helmets were worn, shields, spears, and padded coats will have been the predominant form of armament. Light infantry wore quilted jerkins"
[2]
[1]: (Haldon 2008, 473-474) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. [2]: (Haldon 2008, 474) Jeffreys E, Haldon J and Cormack R eds. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. Oxford. |
||||||
|
No information in the archaeological evidence for this time
|
||||||
|
Pliny (6.161-62) said probably referring to a civilian context "The Arabs wear turbans or else go with their hair unshorn" - however a thick Turban might potentially be used as head protection in warfare.
[1]
Leather shields.
[2]
[1]: (Hoyland 2001, 46) Robert G Hoyland. 2001. Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam. Routledge. London. [2]: (Hoyland 2001, 189) Robert G Hoyland. 2001. Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
The Turcomen tribal soldiers fought on horse back, wore leather-armour, using tactics such as “harassment horse archery”.
[1]
Even when the Seljuks adopted new military organisation mounted archers remained central to their forces. The ghulam slave soldiers “fought and were equipped in much the same manner as the ghulams and mamluks” elsewhere in Middle east.
[1]
At its best equipment was similar to that used in Iran "with perhaps some Byzantine or even Western European influence.”
[1]
[1]: Nicolle, David. Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era, 1050-1350: Islam, Eastern Europe and Asia. Rev. and updated ed. London : Mechanicsburg, Pa: Greenhill Books ; Stackpole Books, 1999. p.208 |
||||||
|
Sources only mention shields
[1]
. It should be noted that sources that specifically describe the way the Illinois Confederation waged war are relatively rare.
[1]: Illinois State Museum, The Illinois, Technology: Weapons (2000), http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/post/htmls/te_houses.html |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups."
[1]
Of course, such objects would not survive in the archaeological record.
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups." The situation only changed "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[1]
Of course, such objects would not survive in the archaeological record.
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups."
[1]
Of course, such objects would not survive in the archaeological record.
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Pliny (6.161-62) said probably referring to a civilian context "The Arabs wear turbans or else go with their hair unshorn" - however a thick Turban might potentially be used as head protection in warfare.
[1]
Leather shields.
[2]
[1]: (Hoyland 2001, 46) Robert G Hoyland. 2001. Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam. Routledge. London. [2]: (Hoyland 2001, 189) Robert G Hoyland. 2001. Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam. Routledge. London. |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups." The situation only changed "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[1]
Of course, such objects would not survive in the archaeological record.
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Inferred from the following. "About two millennia ago, during the Middle Woodland period, which spanned several hundred years, intergroup conflict ending in violence was largely absent from eastern North America. Compared to both earlier Archaic hunter-gatherers and later village agriculturalists, few Middle Woodland skeletons have projectile points lodged in bones, distinctive stone-axe injuries, or signs of mutilation such as decapitation and scalping. [...] The scarcity of such injuries is not a result of inadequate sampling, since there are large and well-preserved skeletal collections dating to this period, especially from the Midwest. A rather sudden adoption of food-procurement practices that shifted the balance between resources and consumers to a time of relative plenty presumably played a big part in establishing conditions conducive to openness among otherwise separate groups." The situation only changed "[l]ate in the first millennium AD".
[1]
Of course, such objects would not survive in the archaeological record.
[1]: (Milner, Chaplin and Zavodny 2013, 96-97) Milner, George, George Chaplin, and Emily Zavodny. 2013. “Conflict and Societal Change in Late Prehistoric Eastern North America.” Evolutionary Anthropology 22: 96-102. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/collectionKey/PAF8KM8K/itemKey/QR77EGA6 |
||||||
|
Illustration in Rashidu’d Din’s "History of the World": "helmets are rounded, with a central ornamental spike, and frequently have a turned-up peak or reinforce over the brow. Nape guards are of mail, leather or fabric, as are probably the deep collars of the lamellar coats."
[1]
"In 1393 we hear of Persian soldiers dressed in mail (zirih baktah), with helmets and cuirasses of velvet-covered iron plates - a form of brigandine is suggested - and their horses protected by a kind of cuirass made of quilted silk."
[1]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. |
||||||
|
Probably present for the Andronovo charioteers but by the 12th century BCE "mounted horsemen armed with bows and arrows replaced chariot drivers"
[1]
so we need to know what armour (if any) they wore. Tazabagyab culture is considered to have had its origin in Andronovo culture.
[2]
Andronovo culture (2000-900 BCE, Alakul phase 2100-1400 BCE, Fedorovo phase 1400-1200 BCE, Alekseyevka phase 1200-1000 BCE). Tazabagyab culture (15th - 11th), Suyarganskaya culture (11th - 9th), Amirabad culture (9th - 8th).
[1]: (Kuz’mina 2007, 138) Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina. 2007. The Origin of the Indo-Iranians. J P Mallory ed. BRILL. Leiden. [2]: (Mallory 1997, 20-21) J P Mallory. Andronovo culture. J P Mallory. D Q Adams. eds. 1997. Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. Chicago. |
||||||
|
Coded present due to the following in later Chinese sources, which are relevant for gaining insight on the weapons and armor of Steppe Nomads, as well as being mention as a general characteristic of Steppe Nomad clothing since 750 BC at least. "Even with strong crossbows that shoot far, and long halberds that hit at a distance, the Hsiung-nu would not be able to ward them off. If the armors are sturdy and the weapons sharp, if the repetition crossbows shot far, and the platoons advance together, the Hsiung-nu will not be able to withstand. If specially trained troops are quick to release (their bows) and the arrows in a single stream hit the target together, then the leather outfit and wooden shields of the Hsiung-nu will not be able to protect them. If they dismount and fight on foot, when swords and halberds clash as [the soldiers] come into close quarters, the Hsiung-nu, who lack infantry training, will not be able to cope."
[1]
[1]: Nicola Di Cosmo. 2002. Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, p. 203 |
||||||
|
"The dearth of illustrative material for the greater part of six centuries is largely due to the wanton destruction caused by two savage invasions from the east and only such finds as the stucco figures from Kara-shar [Central Asian warrior, eighth to tenth century] tell us that in all this period there had been little change."
[1]
"... a fragment of a leather-covered circular wooden shield has survived, bearing a painting of a mounted warrior. This was found in the ruins of the castle of Mug, east of Samarkand, and with it were many documents dating the destruction of the place to the eighth century - when the Persian prince who held it rebelled against the local Arab ruler."
[1]
"Many of the early Persian miniatures, particularly those under Mongol influence of the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, seldom illustrate shields. When they do the shields would seem to be of stout hide—small, circular, and convex, with applied metal bosses."
[1]
[1]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. |
||||||
|
"leather shield"
[1]
"In 1393 we hear of Persian soldiers dressed in mail (zirih baktah), with helmets and cuirasses of velvet-covered iron plates - a form of brigandine is suggested - and their horses protected by a kind of cuirass made of quilted silk."
[2]
[1]: (Marozzi 2004, 183) Marozzi, J. 2004. Tamerlane. HarperCollinsPublishers. London. [2]: (Robinson 1967) Robinson, H. Russell. 1967. Oriental Armour. Walker and Co. New York. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
Shaykh Abd al-Malik stated after fighting with the Mamluks " I fought on the day of al-Mazhaf wearing a coat of mail, underneath which was an oil cloth. The bullets and arrows hit me, they pierced the coat of mail and when they attained the oil cloth they were smothered because of the wax. When the fighting was over I put off the coat of mail, I took out the oil cloth and shook it and then bullets and arrows, eighteen all told tumbled out of it"!
[1]
"The others (these are presumably the Tihamah tribesmen) ... They also carry in their hand a dart and a short broad sword and wear a cloth vest of red or some other colour stuffed with cotton which protects them from the cold and also from their enemies. They make use of this when they go out to fight."
[2]
[1]: Porter, Venetia Ann (1992) The history and monuments of the Tahirid dynasty of the Yemen 858-923/1454-1517, Durham theses, Durham University, p. 127, Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5867/ [2]: Porter, Venetia Ann (1992) The history and monuments of the Tahirid dynasty of the Yemen 858-923/1454-1517, Durham theses, Durham University, pp. 111-113, Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5867/ |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
"Practical considerations, however, prevailed during the South African campaigns and fighting men in the Boer War needed the large shady hat of soft felt with brim that could be lowered to shield eyes or nape ... The soft khaki felt hat of the Boer War proved acceptable and comfortable and its shape was retained for the the Civil Imperial Volunteers. ... At the outbreak of the First World War the peaked cap proved a light and practical form of headwear for all ranks, but under shellfire the metal helmet (or ’tin hat’) protected the head against shrapnel."
[1]
"The foreign service helmet was introduced in 1877. Made of cork covered in khaki cloth, it was usually worn with the curtain or neck protector. The tunic was also of khaki cloth ... Trousers were of the same material and were worn with puttees."
[2]
[1]: Hilda Amphlett.1974 (2003). Hats: A History of Fashion in Headwear. Dover Publications, Inc. Mineola. [2]: Christopher Wilkinson-Latham. 1977. The Boar War. Osprey Publishing. |
||||||
|
-
|
||||||
|
-
|
||||||