Will the real Mongol lamellar please stand up.

[LCJr]

Need a little help deciding which is probably the most accurate image(s) of Mongol lamellar armor for around the mid 13th century.  I know it's probably a tricky question as their style was surely influenced by the peoples they conquered.

1.  I've seen excerpts from Robinson's book on oriental armor that the each row of horizontal bands were separated from the bands above and below by a strip of leather.  This seems to match what I've seen in period illustrations of the Indian campaigns.  Something similar to this.  Although I believe this particular armor is Chinese.


2.  Osprey Mongol Warrior 1200-1350 by  Stephan Turnbull illustrated by Wayne Reynolds.  "Typical" lamellar. Remind anyone of Khergit Guard armor?


3.  Osprey again, Attila and Nomad Hordes by Nicolle and illustrated by McBride.  Supposed to be a Mongol chieftan with alternate rows of the lamellar covered by cloth.  This one strikes me as fantasy.  Seems to me the movement of the individual plates would eat the cloth up.


4.  Which do you think was the more common material used for the lames?  Metal or leather?  Although that probably depended on the wealth of owner as much as anything.

Anyone have any images or links to surviving pieces?

Please share you opinions on the subject and your opinions of the above authors.  I've been thinking we need a sticky thread rating the accuracy of info and illustrations in the Osprey books since they're a very common source of info.

 

[The Wandering Knight]

Well to answer the "most common material" bit, I'd say horn or leather for the Mongols.  Not quite the expert on that, though.

 

[Cirdan]

I'd agree with that. Leather was certainly the most common material in the Arab/Muslim world, and horn is listed before leather in Al-Tarsusi's Tabsira IIRC, so it would make sense for the Mongols (nomads not really being known for their furnaces, and all) not to make heavier use of metal. Neither 1 nor 2 would jar with what I know but I couldn't say for certain the Mongols used them--1 seems typically East-Asian and 2 seems pretty much the generic lamellar anyone would think of, including (and perhaps especially) the non-initiate who'd only heard a succinct description. No.3 looks abit more odd, how is the cloth supposed to be attached and why is it there?

 

[The Wandering Knight]

Well, it lists him as a chief.  It could well be gold plating or leather.

 

[Aqtai]

Probably the closest surviving thing to Mongol lamellar armour are the lamellar armours used in Tibet up until the the early 20th century. Several of these are now in Museums and the Metropolitan had an excellent exhibition of Tibetan armours a few years ago:
http://www.metmuseum.org/special/se_event.asp?OccurrenceId=%7BDD23FA42-2DC3-4DBD-82CB-CB529C69DC56%7D

The armours in the Catalogue date from the 13th to 20th century and a few are of Mongol origin. Most unsurprisingly are iron, leather doesn't survive that well, but there a few leather armours too.

Here are some of them:


Iron armours:



A photo I took of an 18th century chinese leather lamellar armour:



Another good source is the "World History" of Rashid Ed-Din. This is a lavishly illustrated early 14th century Persian Manuscript, produced when Iran was under Mongol rule, which has many depictions of Mongol armour, including lamellar.  Armour similar to No 3 (the last Osprey picture) is depicted in many late 14th century Persian miniature paintings. It is assumed to show lamellar armour where the lamellae are covered with cloth or leather strips as decoration and/or waterproofing.  That particular picture (I have that book!) is based on a reconstruction by M. V. Gorelik.

Another source is John of Piano Carpini, the Pope's ambassador to the Mongols, who was sent to Mongolia in 1245 AD and left a detailed description of the Mongols. Carpini described how the Mongols made armour, saying; "They took a number of thin plates of metal, a finger's breadth wide and a hand's breadth in length, and pierced 8 holes in each plate. A series of such plates were bound together with leather thongs, and then several of these strips would be joined together to make an armour plate."  Carpini noted that the armour was polished so brightly that one could see one's reflection in it. I got this info from Ospreys "The Mongols" by S. R. Turnbull (1980). Turnbull mentions elsewhere in the text that the Mongols also used leather armour waterproofed by covering it with a crude lacquer made from pitch. Unfortunately, because this is an Osprey book, no references are given.

So of your 3 images the middle one (No 2) is probably the most accurate.

 

[Destichado]

Probably the closest surviving thing to Mongol lamellar armour are the lamellar armours used in Tibet up until the the early 20th century.

I can get you closer than that.  The Mongolians never stopped using them.

That's the President of Mongolia in the red armor and shaking hands with GW, and his secret service in the lammelar on horseback. 

 

[Aqtai]

I think this is "costume armour" and does not necessarily look like the armour that the Mongols wore 800 years ago. Saying that though, although it's a small picture, the lamellar armour does look surprisingly accurate.

 

[LCJr]

Aqtai, thanks for the lacquered leather lamellar I hadn't seen that one before. 

The only thing that had put me off about the Met exhibit is the late date of most of the pieces.  But then again lamellar doesn't appear to have changed that much over the centuries.

I've seen the photo you took of the Chinese armor before.  Have you posted it here before or on that other forum you hang out on?

I may have seen images from "World History" scattered across the net.  I'll look for those again.

What do you think of Gorelik and his art?  I've seen a few a negative comments about his artwork.  That it's either over the top or only show what the wealthiest of the elite would be equipped with.

 

[Aqtai]

Aqtai, thanks for the lacquered leather lamellar I hadn't seen that one before. 

The only thing that had put me off about the Met exhibit is the late date of most of the pieces.  But then again lamellar doesn't appear to have changed that much over the centuries.

Precisely, lamellar hardly evolves at all. 17th-18th century Tibetan lamellar armour probably looks a lot like 12th-13th century Sino-Mongol lamellar armour.

I've seen the photo you took of the Chinese armor before.  Have you posted it here before or on that other forum you hang out on?

I think I've posted that photo of Chinese leather lamellar armour on a few forums. I'm sure that other people have "borrowed" it too.

I may have seen images from "World History" scattered across the net.  I'll look for those again.

What do you think of Gorelik and his art?  I've seen a few a negative comments about his artwork.  That it's either over the top or only show what the wealthiest of the elite would be equipped with.

Gorelik is a bit of a pioneer in his way, but I would agree with those comments to a certain extent. I do feel he tends to over romanticise and his reconstructions are a bit OTT.  Igor Dzis, another great Russian (?) artist is similar in this respect. But I wouldn't discount Gorelik, he has done a huge amount of research into Central Asian and Russian armour. Despite his flaws, the field would be much poorer without him.

 

[pentagathus]

The mongolians used a copy of chineese armour. It was lots of small strips of iron sewed on to stiff leather. They were made so that the iron strips overlapped each other. Thats about all I can tell you.

 

[LCJr]

Would this be some of Dzis's work?  Found 3 images by this artist but they were uncredited.


Anyone have any opinion's on the historical accuracy of the Invasion Scrolls?
http://www.bowdoin.edu/mongol-scrolls/
From the original.

From the 19th century woodblock style "reissue".


To my eyes it looks like the artist drew the same basic outline for all the Mongols/Chinese/Koreans and then filled it in as needed for the various types of clothing and armor.

A helmet including partial face/throat protection seems plausible to me. I've just yet to see examples or representations of them elsewhere.  The other thing that caught my eye is in the original the few suits of lamellar are done in white.

 

[Vovolov]

Probably the closest surviving thing to Mongol lamellar armour are the lamellar armours used in Tibet up until the the early 20th century.

I can get you closer than that.  The Mongolians never stopped using them.

*snip*

That's the President of Mongolia in the red armor and shaking hands with GW, and his secret service in the lammelar on horseback. 

That is freaking awesome! Did leather actually protect you, though? I mean, cutting through leather can't be that hard, can it?

 

[Aqtai]

...A helmet including partial face/throat protection seems plausible to me. I've just yet to see examples or representations of them elsewhere.  The other thing that caught my eye is in the original the few suits of lamellar are done in white.

I've seen helmets like that in a late 14th century Persian miniature painting. I'll try and scan a picture of it later.

BTW, that looks like it could be Dzis' work.

With regards to the Japanese miniatures, taking into account Japanese artistic conventions, they are probably still pretty accurate. The armour shown in them is consistent with that shown in contemporary Persian depictions of Mongol warriors, even though Iran and Japan are thousands of miles apart.

 

[Highelfwarrior]

I think this is "costume armour" and does not necessarily look like the armour that the Mongols wore 800 years ago.

I actually doubt that. The mongolian people are really fond of their past, I kindof doubt they would give anything but a very accurate remake to their very own president.

 

[LCJr]

Found these from the Yuan Dynasty.

Found this image on a forum caption says it was captured during the Mongol invasion of Japan and is in a Japanese museum.  I'm guessing brigandine is the best classification for this type of armor.  The helmet does have a brigandine neck/face guard like the ones shown in the invasion scroll.

These are "fake brigandines".  Apparently they were very popular court dress.  I posted these because it's easier to see the rivet pattern.

What the real brigandine looks like on the inside.
http://depts.washington.edu/silkroad/museums/ubhist/chingis.html

 

[The Wandering Knight]

Probably the closest surviving thing to Mongol lamellar armour are the lamellar armours used in Tibet up until the the early 20th century.

I can get you closer than that.  The Mongolians never stopped using them.

*snip*

That's the President of Mongolia in the red armor and shaking hands with GW, and his secret service in the lammelar on horseback. 

That is freaking awesome! Did leather actually protect you, though? I mean, cutting through leather can't be that hard, can it?

Well, it's better than bare flesh.  Basically, weaker cuts that would be a hefty wound on you would become much less with thick leather in the way.

 

[Cirdan]

Depends on whether it's boiled or not. Unboiled leather is better than nothing, especially if it's thick, but it's more tough traveling clothing than real armour. Anything that could actually kill will probably go through soft leather with ease.

Boiled leather, however, is a whole different can o' worms. When it's boiled it becomes hard, and mostly rigid--it retains some flexibility but nowhere near as much as it originally had. Boiled leather--often called cuir bouilli, which is the French term for it--was the poor man's metal plate; pretty much anything that could be made out of metal plates could, and was, made out of boiled leather, up to and including 15th century European full plate harnesses (although, for jousting at least, it was more common to have a steel cuirass and cuir bouilli arm- and leg-guards, according to King René's book of jousting). Boiled leather was also sometimes preferred to steel for practical reasons, being slightly flexible and much lighter, although on the downside it was also somewhat less resistant. However, it was still tough enough for French king François I to be wearing a cuir bouilli cuirass at Marignano in 1515, when he clearly had the alternative of steel (and indeed had not one, but several, armours in his baggages).

 

[LCJr]

To add to what Cirdan said most of the Asian leather was "lacquered".  In the case of the Mongols this may have been a glue made from fish.  The lacquer not only helps protect the leather from the elements but soaks into and hardens the leather.

 

[The Wandering Knight]

Agreed.  I messed with boiled leather, and had originally started a vest of wax-hardened scales until I realized wax is a lubricant.

 

[Aqtai]

With regards to that leather lamellar,  I scanned the picture from Donald LaRocca's "Warriors of the Himalayas". It is from Eastern Tibet and dates to the 15th-17th century.  The shape and size of the lamellae show the influence of the classic iron lamellar armours associated with central Tibet. The material, decoration and lacing pattern shows the influence of two distinctive styles of leather lamellar armours worn by the Naxi and the Yi in Yunnan and Sichuan to the East. A carbon-14 test of this armour gave a date range of 1440-1640 AD.  The lamellae have a hard, shiny, dark red surface, probably from a shellac or a form of varnish rather than true lacquer and are decorated with floral and leaf designs in reddish gold.  The size of the lamellae is 8-8.2 cm by 2.2 to 3.2 cm wide, which is wider than the lamellae on iron armours. The same book also has pictures of Tibetan or Mongol leather vambraces, and a leather helmet, although this item was probably ceremonial.