War Mask | Mongolian or Tibetan". www.metmuseum.org. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art . Retrieved 15 June 2021. The earliest evidence points to the early- Iron Age Assyrians as the people responsible for the early development and spread of this form of armour, during the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In the numerous battle scenes depicted in the reliefs from Niniveh and Nimrud, commemorating the victories of Ashurnasirpal and Ashurbanipal from the 8th and 7th centuries BCE, hundreds of Assyrian soldiers, both infantry and cavalry, are represented wearing cuirasses constructed of lamellae. These cuirasses reach from shoulder to waist, and in many instances they have short, close sleeves. If we accept the representations as correct and translate the method of construction literally, then we are confronted with a type of lamellar armour quite different from later specimens. [2] Lamellar armour ( klivanion) consists of a large number of leather, horn or metal plates (‘lames’), typically rectangular or with slightly rounded corners, frequently around 1½” x 3½” (though different sized lames could be used in different parts of the same armour), laced together with leather thonging. Lames should be laced together first as rows, overlapping horizontally in both directions from the centre of the chest to the middle of the spine. The rows should then be assembled so that they overlap upwards (i.e. start from the top, with the second row on top of the one above it) and should be continuous (i.e. no distinction between body, skirt and sleeves). A distinctive feature of Roman lamellar in the eleventh and twelfth centuries was that the vertical fastening used a single rivet. Both Chinese and European sources concur that Mongols wore substantial armour capable of stopping arrows. A Song source notes that one way to pierce heavily clad Mongol warriors was to use small arrows capable of entering the eye slits of their helmet. [79] According to Thomas the Archdeacon, Mongol arrows were capable of penetrating all known types of armour at the time, but their own leather armour could withstand the arrows of their enemies. However he also mentions that the Mongols feared crossbows. [80] Burch E. S., Jr. 1974. Eskimo Warfare in Northwest Alaska // Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska. Vol. 16. Fairbanks. ¹ 2.

Lamellar armour was often worn by itself or as an augmentation to other armour, such as over a mail hauberk. The lamellar cuirass was especially popular with the Rus, as well as Mongols, Turks, Avars, other steppe peoples, as well as migratory groups such as the Langobards as it was simple to create and maintain. Lamellar helmets were also employed by Migration Era and Early Medieval peoples. [ citation needed] Chinese armour was predominantly lamellar from the Warring States period (481 BC–221 BC) onward, prior to which animal parts such as rhinoceros hide, rawhide, and turtle shells were used for protection. Lamellar armour was supplemented by scale armour since the Warring States period or earlier. Partial plate armour was popular from the Eastern and Southern dynasties (420–589), and mail and mountain pattern armour from the Tang dynasty (618–907). Chain mail had been known since the Han dynasty, but did not see widespread production or battlefield use, and may have seen as "exotic foreign armor" used as a display of wealth for wealthier officers and soldiers. During the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), brigandine began to supplant lamellar armour and was used to a great degree into the Qing dynasty (1644–1912). By the 19th century most Qing armour, which was of the brigandine type, were purely ceremonial, having kept the outer studs for aesthetic purposes, and omitted the protective metal plates. Peers, C. J. (2006), Soldiers of the Dragon: Chinese Armies 1500 BC - AD 1840, Osprey Publishing Ltd

Steadfast and Indomitable Heavy Cavalrymen

There is an alternative theory that mountain pattern armour is simply a result of very stylistic depictions of mail armour, [63] but known depictions of mail armour in Chinese art do not match with mountain pattern armour either.

Swords were very costly to make, and a sign of high status. They were rarely used and some swords found in graves were probably not sturdy enough for battle or raiding, and instead were likely decorative items. [7] [8] Like Roman spathae, they were worn in leather-bound wooden scabbards suspended from a strap across the right shoulder. [ citation needed] Early blades were pattern welded, a technique in which strips of wrought iron and mild steel were twisted and forged together, with the addition of a hardened edge. [9] Later blades of homogeneous steel, imported probably from the Rhineland, many bearing inlaid makers' marks and inscriptions, such as INGELRII or VLFBERHT. Local craftsmen often added their own elaborately decorated hilts, and many swords were given names, such as Leg-biter and Gold-hilt. [10] The sword grip was usually made of an organic material, such as wood, horn, or antler (which does not often survive for archaeological uncovering), and may well have been wound around with textile. [11] Andrade, Tonio (2016), The Gunpowder Age: China, Military Innovation, and the Rise of the West in World History, Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-13597-7 .This fur-lined robe-like clothing had a button closure a few inches below the right armpit and was closed by crossing the left flap over the right. Anti-Arrow Silk Clothing A Mongolian warrior with a traditional coat. One of the figures of mounted Mongol Yuan soldiers from the excavation of Hesheng Tomb in Qindu District, China. (Image: 三猎) This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sourcesin this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. ( December 2010) ( Learn how and when to remove this template message) One little apron is folded over and stitched to another at the top so that the plates can be securely attached. Thus, the plates provide homogeneous protection, and identical armor is created for their horses and soldiers. The armor is so shiny that a man can look directly at his reflection.” Ystoria Mongalorum, by Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (1185–1252). Dawson, Tim (1998). "Kremasmata, Kabadion, Klibanion: Some aspects of middle Byzantine military equipment reconsidered" (PDF). Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies. 22 (1): 45. doi: 10.1179/byz.1998.22.1.38. S2CID 162126718 . Retrieved 9 March 2020.

A common myth is that brigandines were so-named because they were a popular choice of protection for bandits and outlaws. [5] This is untrue. Originally the term "brigand" referred to a foot soldier, and a brigandine was simply a type of armour worn by a foot soldier. It had nothing to do with its alleged ability to be concealed by bandits. In fact, brigandines were highly fashionable and were ostentatiously displayed by wealthy aristocrats both in European and in Asian courts. Chain mail’s high price, cumbersome size, and challenging maintenance history made it a well-known but uncommon kind of armor for the Mongols. The elite of the Mongol army were mounted archers who needed armor that would not restrict their movement while riding. Contrary to popular belief, lamellar armor does not hinder mobility as much as commonly portrayed. While it may not offer the same level of flexibility as lighter armors like chainmail, skilled wearers can still move relatively freely. The individual lamellae are typically attached using flexible materials such as leather or fabric, allowing for some degree of movement and articulation. Misconception: Lamellar Armor is Heavy and Cumbersome English literature in the early 19th century mentions Chinese rattan shields that were "almost musket proof", [92] however another English source in the late 19th century states that they did nothing to protect their users during an advance on a Muslim stronghold, in which they were all invariably shot to death. [66] Anyone interested in lamellar armour should read Timothy Dawson's 'Armour Never Wearies': Scale and Lamellar Armour in the West, from the the Bronze Age to the 19th Century (History Press, 2013).

Lamellar Armor in Modern Interpretations

The Chinese Empire and other Central Asian and Middle Eastern nations the Mongols faced served as inspiration for this hybrid armor that Mongol Empire warriors wore over the course of centuries. Scale and lamellar armor were the most common types of Mongolian armor. Hardened Leather Lamellar armour is a type of body armour, made from small rectangular plates (scales or lamellae) of iron or steel, leather ( rawhide), or bronze laced into horizontal rows. Lamellar armour was used over a wide range of time periods in Central Asia, Eastern Asia (especially in China, Japan, Mongolia, and Tibet), Western Asia, and Eastern Europe. The earliest evidence for lamellar armour comes from sculpted artwork of the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911–609 BCE) in the Near East. The elite guards of the Liang dynasty (502–557) were equipped with helmets, uniforms, and armour that "trimmed in gold and silver and glistening under the sun's glare," [39] cost in all some several hundred thousand coppers for each soldier. The display reportedly sapped the spirits of Jin warriors, although the Jin commander Zhou Dewei said they were "more intent on posing than engaging the enemy." [39] Banded armour [ edit ] Lewis, Mark Edward (2007), The Early Chinese Empires: Qin and Han, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Armour made up of leather, horn or metal segments forming a protective layer was relatively common in the East, especially among the tribes of the steppe. Metal lames were frequently used in the Roman East as they offered the best quality protection, although leather could be hardened by boiling or waxing to provide considerable protection without adding much weight.