O'Yoroi (大鎧) - Classical Samurai Armor
O'Yoroi (大鎧) - Classical Samurai Armor
The main O'yoroi section, with the additional plates, from 甲冑備考
Within the "Samurai Culture" there are few things that could get as much value as the "Great Harness", the O'Yoroi (大鎧)*.
In fact, since the earliest period and until the very end of the Samurai class, this armor have always been considered a symbol of being a warrior in Japan.
Unlike the modern armors, this particular harness could be categorized in one big family, although there were some changes during the ages.
It was use as an effective piece of gear on the Japanese battlefield from the 10th to the early 14th century, and its usage started to decline in the late 13th century, when the more versatile Dō Maru (胴丸) and Haramaki (腹巻) styles of armor started to replace it among the nobles.
Despite its retirement from the field, the O'Yoroi was still produced during the later centuries to be donated to shrines or to function as a form of heraldry.
It saw a massive "revival" during the peaceful Edo period, especially after the work of Arai Hakuseki (新井白石) in the late 17th and early 18th century, when it was often integrated with modern armor's components.
In fact, since the earliest period and until the very end of the Samurai class, this armor have always been considered a symbol of being a warrior in Japan.
Unlike the modern armors, this particular harness could be categorized in one big family, although there were some changes during the ages.
It was use as an effective piece of gear on the Japanese battlefield from the 10th to the early 14th century, and its usage started to decline in the late 13th century, when the more versatile Dō Maru (胴丸) and Haramaki (腹巻) styles of armor started to replace it among the nobles.
Despite its retirement from the field, the O'Yoroi was still produced during the later centuries to be donated to shrines or to function as a form of heraldry.
It saw a massive "revival" during the peaceful Edo period, especially after the work of Arai Hakuseki (新井白石) in the late 17th and early 18th century, when it was often integrated with modern armor's components.
It is important to highlight that this type of harness was specifically made to be worn on horseback and to allow with great efficiency the use of the bow, two particular features that could be found among the early Samurai, which were predominantly horse archers from the 10th to the 14th century.
In fact, out of this specific context (when fighting on foot with a sword for example) the armor was an obstacle rather than an asset.
In fact, out of this specific context (when fighting on foot with a sword for example) the armor was an obstacle rather than an asset.
Samurai warriors of the Kamakura Period, on horseback, wearing the O'yoroi and carrying bows, from the famous Heiji monogatari emaki - 平治物語絵巻.
History and Development
It's hard to establish whit accuracy when this type of armors emerged; recent studies done by Y. Sasama (笹間良彦) suggested that the O'yoroi was developed from the Uchikake Keiko (打掛挂甲), a form of lamellar armor resembling a coat. The first true O'yoroi started to be produced around the 10th century, and the design reached its maturity in the 12th century.
The evolution pattern made by Sasama from the Uchikake keiko ( left) of the 8th century to the early O'yoroi (right) of the 10th century.
The famous Akai itō odoshi yoroi (赤絲威鎧) prior to the restoration; the whole suit is extremely decorated with gold inlays.
Construction and Design
The evolution pattern made by Sasama from the Uchikake keiko ( left) of the 8th century to the early O'yoroi (right) of the 10th century.
By the 10th century, we start to see the main features of the Oyoroi; a "C" shaped section that encased the torso, the left side and the back, a separated plate that protected the right side, each section with is own panel that extended down to protect the upper legs and two separated plates that protected the armpits, which were both made of a lamellar structure in this period.
The armor also started to acquire its famous "boxy" shape.
Early O'yoroi were laced almost exclusively with leather tongs, silk laces would have become prominent only by the 13th century.
Throughout its development there was a trend of diminishing the size (and thus increasing the number) of the lamellae used to assemble the armor; if by the Heain period the number of scales used to made the section that protected the torso in was of 57, by the mid Kamakura it was 83, and by the early Muromachi it was 103.
Ceremonial armors made in the 15th century could have up to 137 scales.
Few changes happened in between the 11th and 12th century, were the basic design of the armor was established, except with some experimentation with different types of scales that will be discussed below, the transition from lamellar to plate of one of the two aforementioned armpit's plate and new types of lacing.Early O'yoroi had also a particular feature in their kusazuri, the panels that protected the upper legs: the ones on the sides were slightly longer than the ones on the front&back, which in turn were split.
This feature was removed by the 12th century.
In the 13th century, an additional plate called waki ita (脇板) protecting the right side was added to the armor, which was also shortened in length by the end of this century; if early Oyoroi armors were in between 80 to 90 cm long, by this period they were in between 60 to 70 cm long.
In between the 12th and 13th century, thanks to the rising popularity of the dōmaru, an hybrid type of armor was created which is called dōmaru-yoroi (胴丸鎧); this armor was essentially an O'yoroi, with its squared design, devoid of the side plate.
The "C" shaped section encased completely the wearer. Instead of the four long, trapezoidal and broad kusazuri panels hanging from the torso protection, this armor has a higher number of rectangular kusazuri, which weren't as large in order to facilitate leg's movement.
The armor also started to acquire its famous "boxy" shape.
Early O'yoroi were laced almost exclusively with leather tongs, silk laces would have become prominent only by the 13th century.
Throughout its development there was a trend of diminishing the size (and thus increasing the number) of the lamellae used to assemble the armor; if by the Heain period the number of scales used to made the section that protected the torso in was of 57, by the mid Kamakura it was 83, and by the early Muromachi it was 103.
Ceremonial armors made in the 15th century could have up to 137 scales.
Few changes happened in between the 11th and 12th century, were the basic design of the armor was established, except with some experimentation with different types of scales that will be discussed below, the transition from lamellar to plate of one of the two aforementioned armpit's plate and new types of lacing.Early O'yoroi had also a particular feature in their kusazuri, the panels that protected the upper legs: the ones on the sides were slightly longer than the ones on the front&back, which in turn were split.
This feature was removed by the 12th century.
In the 13th century, an additional plate called waki ita (脇板) protecting the right side was added to the armor, which was also shortened in length by the end of this century; if early Oyoroi armors were in between 80 to 90 cm long, by this period they were in between 60 to 70 cm long.
In between the 12th and 13th century, thanks to the rising popularity of the dōmaru, an hybrid type of armor was created which is called dōmaru-yoroi (胴丸鎧); this armor was essentially an O'yoroi, with its squared design, devoid of the side plate.
The "C" shaped section encased completely the wearer. Instead of the four long, trapezoidal and broad kusazuri panels hanging from the torso protection, this armor has a higher number of rectangular kusazuri, which weren't as large in order to facilitate leg's movement.
This armor however, despite never being the mainstream version of O'yoroi, was soon discarded, together with the main one, in favor of the much more simpler dōmaru in the 14th century.
General outlook of different versions of O'yoroi; from left to right, an early O'yoroi of the Heian period, a Dōmaruyoroi of the 13th century and an O'yoroi of the late 13th century. Sketches made by me.
In fact, after the failed Mongol Invasions of the late 13th century, the O'yoroi was slowly dismissed in the early 14th century, when it started to be considered a ceremonial object, highly decorated and not meant to actual battles.
Later on, as I have already written above, the O'yoroi was still produced as a form of heraldry, often mixed with modern armor's improvements.
General outlook of different versions of O'yoroi; from left to right, an early O'yoroi of the Heian period, a Dōmaruyoroi of the 13th century and an O'yoroi of the late 13th century. Sketches made by me.
In fact, after the failed Mongol Invasions of the late 13th century, the O'yoroi was slowly dismissed in the early 14th century, when it started to be considered a ceremonial object, highly decorated and not meant to actual battles.
Later on, as I have already written above, the O'yoroi was still produced as a form of heraldry, often mixed with modern armor's improvements.
The famous Akai itō odoshi yoroi (赤絲威鎧) prior to the restoration; the whole suit is extremely decorated with gold inlays.
The O'yoroi is an harness that protects all the upper body but also the upper legs on the sides, the front and on the back. Its shape is more similar (and behave more like) a coat, like its predecessor.
However, it was the structure and the construction that made the O'yoroi a different form of armor from the Uchikake Keiko.
Another print by Yoshitoshi; in this case, the O'yoroi should collapse on itself due to the lack of tomegawa internal laces; this is an example of the later O'yoroi made with modern elements and improvement. Notice the lack of the waki ita on the side of the armor, like the O'yoroi of the 12th and 11th century.
The lamellae instead of being assembled in the yurugi-zane (loosely laced scales) method, the classical way to lace lamellar armors, were bounded together with the nurigatame-zane method, which literally means "lacquer stiffened scales":
The lamellae were laced in a board (sane-ita, 札板) and then lacquered with thick layers of traditional Japanese lacquer; the board made of scales behave more like a plate, dissipating the energy of a blow throughout the entire structure, which in turn was quite rigid (although a proper term to describe it should be semi-flexible).
If the energy of the blow was strong enough to bypass the stiffness of the lacquer, the board instead of failing and cracking could still count on the "springiness" of the laces, which brought back the lamellae in their original place: this is the same principle that allow the harness to encircle the body without hinges, while retaining its boxy shape.
The lamellae itself were quite different in materials, arrangement and size depending on the time period. They are called Kozane (小札) and were made either of hardened and pressed rawhide (nerigawa, 練革) or iron/steel (tetsu, 鉄).
Heian period kozane measured in between 3.0 and 4.7 cm in width and stood about 6.7 and 8 cm in height, but in the Kamakura period they started to get smaller and smaller.
There were also extremely big scales called Ōaramezane (大荒目札) which measured up to 8.7 cm in width but never saw a widespread use.
The thickness varied a lot, from 1 mm to 2 mm for iron scales with an average of 1.5 mm, and up to 5 mm with rawhide ones, with an average of 3 mm. Due to the overlapping in the lamellar structure, thicker scales weren't used as much; in fact, each scale in this structure overlaps for half of their thickness with the next one, creating a double thickness, which was sometimes further increased if mitsume-zane (三つ目札) were used: in this scenario we could speak of a triple overlapping, but said lamellae were never common due to weight&cost issues.
As I've said before, the scales where made of iron or rawhide; the choice of the second material was not only economical, since rawhide was apparently less expensive than iron, but also a matter of weight.
Using a full iron suit would have been prohibitive in terms of weight, and the O'yoroi as it was made was already somewhat heavy.
Although the defensive property of rawhide are often misunderstood, and they would be explained in another article, it is fair to highlight that the O'yoroi was not structurally weak despite being made of two different material, because of the way the two were combined and thanks to the overlapping of each lamellae.
In fact there were essentially two way of assembling these different scales; the less defensive was called Kane maze (金混ぜ) where all the iron scales were concentrated on the most important part of the body, like the front part of the torso, while the less vital zone like the sides were covered only of rawhide scales.
Another, much more defensive way to assemble the scale, was to alternate one rawhide lamellae and an iron one. With this method, all the surface of the body was covered by iron scales, which were lined with a rawhide one, thanks to the overlapping.
The former prevent penetration and the latter absorb eventual shocks thanks to its compression.
This method was called ichi mai maze (一枚混ぜ).
A detail from the Heiji Monogatari Emaki depicting a Mounted Samurai with an O'yoroi.
The sane-ita where then laced vertically with the traditional Japanese lacing methods called Kebiki Odoshi (毛引脅し).
To accomodate the laces, the kozane were slightly "S" shaped;
Here in this section of a saneita you can see the "S" shaped construction, which was further enhanced by lacquer.
In the Japanese tradition, the patterns and color in which the warrior chooses to lace his armor were quite important and quite different, to the point that some Samurai families started to be associated with precise odoshi colors.
This became a problem when members of the same family fight on opposite factions, but that's a topic for another article.
It is also said that the words came from the verb Odosu (脅す), which means "to intimidate".
The whole armor if not worn was able to collapse like a telescope on itself due to the laced structure.
The upper body was protected by a main "C" shaped lamellar structure and a separated side plate, the Waidate (脇盾).
The main structure was quite rigid and squared; in fact its boxy like appearance was built to create a "buffer" zone between the wearer and the armor and avoid any potential injury from mild penetration of arrows.
While this was clearly a hindrance on foot, since it didn't allow the weight to rest on the hips, it wasn't a major issue on horseback: since the wearer was seated, the armor rested on the upper leg as well as on the saddle, without applying any further stress on the shoulders.
The front was covered with a thin layer of leather called tsurubashiri gawa (弦走り革) , which allowed the bowstring to run smoothly across the chest, and covered all the silk strings. This leather application was highly decorated with various topics.
There was also a plate structure, the muna-ita (胸板) at the very top of the front structure.
On the left side, as well as the back, the laces were exposed. As I already said, during the 13th century an additional plated structure, the waki ita, resembling the waidate, was added to the left side, to allow better protection of the armpit.
On the back there was a reversed laced structure called saka-ita (逆板), which connects to the wadagami (肩上), the part that allow the harness to sit on the wearer's shoulder.
On this zone, two separated plates called Shoji no ita (障子の板) protruded near the neck of the warrior; their purpose was to stop incoming blows or violent movement of the big shoulder guards.
On the right side, instead of a lamellar structure, a plate was preferred, the aforementioned Waidate (脇楯).
The reason of this choice was that the right side was the most likely to receive an attack, and plates provided better protection.
This plate was composed of the main section that protected the side of the body, the tsubo ita (壷板) and its own pendant kusazuri (草摺) which protected the upper legs.
The tsubo ita was usually made with 4 or 2 riveted smaller plates, but plates made with one single sheet of iron were fairly common too.
The earliest examples of tsubo ita were generally rectangular plates that were taller than they were wide.
The upper edge of the plate was shaped with a concave indentation to accommodate the underside of the arm while the entire plate was rolled to give it a subtle horizontal curvature that allowed it to better contour to the side of the torso. Over time the shape of the tsubo ita changed so that it tapered from top to bottom with a subtle inward curve. The bottom edge of the plate was also arched up and outward so that the tsubo ita sat more comfortably on the hip.
This plate was worn and laced before putting on the main O'yoroi armor, and then secured further with a cord that run across the waist, which also ensured the closure of the O'yoroi itself.
Another illustration of O'yoroi components;
*Some scholars use the term O'Yoroi for a complete set of armor, with a pair of Sode and a Kabuto too; the body armor in this case is just called Yoroi. Sometimes to identify the full set the term Yoroikabuto is used.
I hope that this very long and detailed article may have entertained you enough! For any question, feel free to leave a comment. If you liked this work of mine, consider sharing it, it would be helpful!
However, it was the structure and the construction that made the O'yoroi a different form of armor from the Uchikake Keiko.
Another print by Yoshitoshi; in this case, the O'yoroi should collapse on itself due to the lack of tomegawa internal laces; this is an example of the later O'yoroi made with modern elements and improvement. Notice the lack of the waki ita on the side of the armor, like the O'yoroi of the 12th and 11th century.
The lamellae instead of being assembled in the yurugi-zane (loosely laced scales) method, the classical way to lace lamellar armors, were bounded together with the nurigatame-zane method, which literally means "lacquer stiffened scales":
The lamellae were laced in a board (sane-ita, 札板) and then lacquered with thick layers of traditional Japanese lacquer; the board made of scales behave more like a plate, dissipating the energy of a blow throughout the entire structure, which in turn was quite rigid (although a proper term to describe it should be semi-flexible).
If the energy of the blow was strong enough to bypass the stiffness of the lacquer, the board instead of failing and cracking could still count on the "springiness" of the laces, which brought back the lamellae in their original place: this is the same principle that allow the harness to encircle the body without hinges, while retaining its boxy shape.
All the process that involved lacquering a Sane ita board, from the left to right. At its final stage, the board is rock solid and is capable to flex only due to the tension of the various laces that hold the boards together.
The lamellae itself were quite different in materials, arrangement and size depending on the time period. They are called Kozane (小札) and were made either of hardened and pressed rawhide (nerigawa, 練革) or iron/steel (tetsu, 鉄).
Heian period kozane measured in between 3.0 and 4.7 cm in width and stood about 6.7 and 8 cm in height, but in the Kamakura period they started to get smaller and smaller.
There were also extremely big scales called Ōaramezane (大荒目札) which measured up to 8.7 cm in width but never saw a widespread use.
The thickness varied a lot, from 1 mm to 2 mm for iron scales with an average of 1.5 mm, and up to 5 mm with rawhide ones, with an average of 3 mm. Due to the overlapping in the lamellar structure, thicker scales weren't used as much; in fact, each scale in this structure overlaps for half of their thickness with the next one, creating a double thickness, which was sometimes further increased if mitsume-zane (三つ目札) were used: in this scenario we could speak of a triple overlapping, but said lamellae were never common due to weight&cost issues.
As I've said before, the scales where made of iron or rawhide; the choice of the second material was not only economical, since rawhide was apparently less expensive than iron, but also a matter of weight.
Using a full iron suit would have been prohibitive in terms of weight, and the O'yoroi as it was made was already somewhat heavy.
Although the defensive property of rawhide are often misunderstood, and they would be explained in another article, it is fair to highlight that the O'yoroi was not structurally weak despite being made of two different material, because of the way the two were combined and thanks to the overlapping of each lamellae.
In fact there were essentially two way of assembling these different scales; the less defensive was called Kane maze (金混ぜ) where all the iron scales were concentrated on the most important part of the body, like the front part of the torso, while the less vital zone like the sides were covered only of rawhide scales.
Another, much more defensive way to assemble the scale, was to alternate one rawhide lamellae and an iron one. With this method, all the surface of the body was covered by iron scales, which were lined with a rawhide one, thanks to the overlapping.
The former prevent penetration and the latter absorb eventual shocks thanks to its compression.
This method was called ichi mai maze (一枚混ぜ).
A detail from the Heiji Monogatari Emaki depicting a Mounted Samurai with an O'yoroi.
The sane-ita where then laced vertically with the traditional Japanese lacing methods called Kebiki Odoshi (毛引脅し).
To accomodate the laces, the kozane were slightly "S" shaped;
Here in this section of a saneita you can see the "S" shaped construction, which was further enhanced by lacquer.
In the Japanese tradition, the patterns and color in which the warrior chooses to lace his armor were quite important and quite different, to the point that some Samurai families started to be associated with precise odoshi colors.
This became a problem when members of the same family fight on opposite factions, but that's a topic for another article.
It is also said that the words came from the verb Odosu (脅す), which means "to intimidate".
The whole armor if not worn was able to collapse like a telescope on itself due to the laced structure.
The upper body was protected by a main "C" shaped lamellar structure and a separated side plate, the Waidate (脇盾).
All the major components of the O'yoroi, with the front, the kyūbi no ita, sendan no ita and the waidate. Taken from 藝州嚴嶋社寶物鎧之図.
The main structure was quite rigid and squared; in fact its boxy like appearance was built to create a "buffer" zone between the wearer and the armor and avoid any potential injury from mild penetration of arrows.
While this was clearly a hindrance on foot, since it didn't allow the weight to rest on the hips, it wasn't a major issue on horseback: since the wearer was seated, the armor rested on the upper leg as well as on the saddle, without applying any further stress on the shoulders.
The front was covered with a thin layer of leather called tsurubashiri gawa (弦走り革) , which allowed the bowstring to run smoothly across the chest, and covered all the silk strings. This leather application was highly decorated with various topics.
There was also a plate structure, the muna-ita (胸板) at the very top of the front structure.
On the left side, as well as the back, the laces were exposed. As I already said, during the 13th century an additional plated structure, the waki ita, resembling the waidate, was added to the left side, to allow better protection of the armpit.
On the back there was a reversed laced structure called saka-ita (逆板), which connects to the wadagami (肩上), the part that allow the harness to sit on the wearer's shoulder.
On this zone, two separated plates called Shoji no ita (障子の板) protruded near the neck of the warrior; their purpose was to stop incoming blows or violent movement of the big shoulder guards.
Another depiction of the O'yoroi, with the back and the waidate illustrated.
On the right side, instead of a lamellar structure, a plate was preferred, the aforementioned Waidate (脇楯).
The reason of this choice was that the right side was the most likely to receive an attack, and plates provided better protection.
This plate was composed of the main section that protected the side of the body, the tsubo ita (壷板) and its own pendant kusazuri (草摺) which protected the upper legs.
The tsubo ita was usually made with 4 or 2 riveted smaller plates, but plates made with one single sheet of iron were fairly common too.
The earliest examples of tsubo ita were generally rectangular plates that were taller than they were wide.
The upper edge of the plate was shaped with a concave indentation to accommodate the underside of the arm while the entire plate was rolled to give it a subtle horizontal curvature that allowed it to better contour to the side of the torso. Over time the shape of the tsubo ita changed so that it tapered from top to bottom with a subtle inward curve. The bottom edge of the plate was also arched up and outward so that the tsubo ita sat more comfortably on the hip.
This plate was worn and laced before putting on the main O'yoroi armor, and then secured further with a cord that run across the waist, which also ensured the closure of the O'yoroi itself.
Another illustration of O'yoroi components;
Two other major parts of a full O'yoroi set were the additional plates on the upper chest, the kyūbi no ita (鳩尾板) and the sendan no ita (栴檀板).
They protected the cords by which the muna ita was connected with the wadagami of the armor and the armpits as well: particularly when the arms were raised to use a bow, for the angle of the shoulders during such movements tended to push the tops of these suspended pieces of armor downward and away from the centre, which in turn caused their lower ends to pivot out and upward so they covered some of the exposed areas of the armpits.
The sendan no ita was suspended from the right and consisted of a solid metal upper plate and three attached suspended lamellar sections.
They protected the cords by which the muna ita was connected with the wadagami of the armor and the armpits as well: particularly when the arms were raised to use a bow, for the angle of the shoulders during such movements tended to push the tops of these suspended pieces of armor downward and away from the centre, which in turn caused their lower ends to pivot out and upward so they covered some of the exposed areas of the armpits.
The sendan no ita was suspended from the right and consisted of a solid metal upper plate and three attached suspended lamellar sections.
The lamellar construction of the sendan no ita was important as it allowed the suspended pendant-like section of armour to collapse onto itself so that it did not interfere with the movements of the warrior’s right arm as he wielded his bow or sword.
The kyūbi no ita instead was made of a single long, subtly arched rectangular metal plate that was generally cut so that the plate tapered in width from top to bottom.
As I've said before, this plate was identical to the sendan in the early designs; however,
As I've said before, this plate was identical to the sendan in the early designs; however,
two factors seem to have influenced the transition to a solid plate, both of which stemmed from the use of the bow as the warrior’s primary weapon.
When the kyūbi no ita was made in lamellar fashion, the lower sane ita flopped around due to the fact that they were secured together by lacing. The irregular and uncontrolled movements of a lamellar kyūbi no ita more than likely interfered with the draw and release of the bowstring; constructing the kyūbi no ita as a solid plate resolved this issue.
Fashioning it from metal also greatly enhanced the protective abilities of the kyūbi no ita, which was important as the upper left armpit area of the torso was one of the most exposed areas of the body of a warrior when he was sighting his bow.
Fashioning it from metal also greatly enhanced the protective abilities of the kyūbi no ita, which was important as the upper left armpit area of the torso was one of the most exposed areas of the body of a warrior when he was sighting his bow.
How the kyūbi and sendan no ita work when using a bow on horseback; sketch made by Y.Sasama. Also, note how all the armor is supposed to rest on the saddle.
The upper legs were protected by the kusazuri, four trapezoidal lamellar panels attached to the armor. These protected almost entirely the legs when on horseback, especially in the earlier periods when the kusazuri of the sides were slightly longer.
The kusazuri were fundamentally a continuation of the cuirass. The left-hand side portion of hip armour, however, was different in that it was attached to the section that protected the torso by an intermediate band of e-gawa-faced leather called a kōmori-tsuke (蝙蝠付け). This was also true for the other side kusazuri, the one hanging from the waidate.
The reason behind this is was to prevent the sword, tanto dagger and bowstring holder that were secured by belts and cords to the left side of the body from rubbing on and damaging the connective lacing along the sides of the cuirass.
A warrior of the 13th century clad in O'yoroi, by Yoshitoshi. O'yoroi were a very popular item in the Ukiyo-e of the 19th century, given the symbolism and the cultural value associated with it.
*Some scholars use the term O'Yoroi for a complete set of armor, with a pair of Sode and a Kabuto too; the body armor in this case is just called Yoroi. Sometimes to identify the full set the term Yoroikabuto is used.
I hope that this very long and detailed article may have entertained you enough! For any question, feel free to leave a comment. If you liked this work of mine, consider sharing it, it would be helpful!
Gunbai
Hello, Gunsen. I absolutely love your articles and am always very eager to read them. I was waiting for pre-sengoku armor to appear here, so I'm very pleased this article boasts as much quality as others about more flashy and popular subjects.
ReplyDeleteIf I may ask, do you plan on writing something on the nodachi/odachi? I'm part of the Jigen-ryu school of nodachi kenjutsu and would be very excited to see every bloody and murderous detail about our weapon of choice written here.
Again, thank you for the efforts and quality you put into these.
Thank you so much for your kind words, they mean a lot for me!!
DeleteYes, I'm planning to cover this weapon too sooner or later; the only thing that I regret is the fact that there are so many things I would love to write but it is a very long process and I want to be as accurate and detailed as possible.
In the meantime I've already wrote something on the Nagamaki, but I think you may have already read that!
A great article as always! Even for me, who spent much of my time reading about armor, the changes suffered by the O-Yoroi over time was unknown (A little silly of me, I think, since many things happen from the X to the XIII century)
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I wanted to ask you ...
https://ar.pinterest.com/pin/367465650829658561/
This type of Sode made with a single plate has a specific name? I've seen it in several armors, but they do not mention that detail.
Thank you so much!
DeleteWell yes there were some changes, especially from the early O'yoroi, although I have to say that in between the 12th and 13th century the changes were minimal, even if armor development was still carried on.
Those single plate sode are called ichi mai sode (一枚袖) and were made in the Edo period as a form of decoration. Since it's Edo, there are tons of names to describe each possible variations. The one you have linked look like a maru sode (丸袖) because it is slightly oval.
That being said, being made by only one plate, they don't allow the flexibility and mobility of the regular tosei sode.
Thank you! I was looking for a long time about that type of Sode, but in English there was not much, only in Japanese. The last time I used google translate to read things about armor in Japanese was quite counterproductive.
DeleteIt's great that you're open to questions about armor! Until I discovered your blog the only way to learn about something more hidden things (I mean, in Japanese) was the Metatron channel, but he talks about more general things.
Thanks again!
I know, English sources available on internet are not as detailed as I would love them to be, and this is the main reason why I created this blog!
DeleteAnyway if you have more questions feel free to ask!
Metatron is good for a beginner; however, sometime his contents are flawed with minor issues and incorrect facts.
For example, the second Samurai armor he has is definitely not from the 14th/15th century as he claims.
Anyway nobody is perfect and I appreciate his efforts!
Particularly I never knew if it was correct or not of his second armor, since my "specialty" is the Tosei gusoku. Anyway there are things that said that I realized by myself that they were absolutely wrong, although nothing catastrophic.
DeleteWell I can understand his situation; I manage to write two articles a month and I focus only on Japanese history.
DeleteSo if you want to do more, you have to make things shorter or simplier, and given the amount of topic he covers there isn't much choice. Anyway I'm glad that you find my blog when you were looking for more info! I hope my works would be useful for you ;)
You write more detailed info on the O yoroi than anything I have read short of a book.
ReplyDeleteCould you write an article about the size, thickness and hardness of the lamellar plates or laminar plates of the Tosei Gusoku?
Thank you so much!!
DeleteI'm planning to write an article which desrcibes the process of making plates for armor in the 16th century and I will also talk about hardness and size of these plates
Is there any regard in which the o-yoroi has superior protection/coverage compared to tosei gusoku?
ReplyDeleteI would say no in general, since tosei gusoku were created later with much more advanced technology and warfare experience.
DeleteHowever, some "stretches to the rule" could be made; pounds per pounds, o'yoroi do are a little bit longer than tosei do, and the kusazuri are bigger so they can cover more of the legs.
In addition to that, there were no "munition grade" o'yoroi, these were the armors of the upper class, so you only get high quality materials. On the other hand, a tosei do issued to an ashigaru was made with cheap, raw and thin metal plates, and it's very likely that the latter would have performed worse than the oyoroi, especially against arrow.
But a full set of o'yoroi (with all the kogusoku components) compared to a full, high quality tosei gusoku, in any way the Oyoroi can be considered better.
Thanks for the answer. I was thinking of something like a samurai centaur and wondering if due to the human form being attached to the horse, the weight issues of the o-yoroi could be negated and how it would compare to the tosei gusoku. However, even in such a fantastical circumstance, the gusoku is just more advanced, right?
DeleteIf you are thinking about a centaur, the problem of the Oyoroi would still be there because you lack the saddle and the neck of the horse; so while the rear of the armor would rest on the back of the horse, the front would not and the balance could even be worsen in my opinion.
DeleteIn any case, tosei gusoku or even do maru are just way more better in terms of functionality!
Great article you gave me a new appreciation the armor much more advanced and complex then I originally give it credit for.
ReplyDeleteBy the way have you finished reading Stephen's ninja book yet I want to hear your opinion in detail on it.
Hi Kevin! I'm glad you were able to revaluate the armor; despite its many flaws, there were some reasons why the Oyoroi was used up until the late 13th century.
DeleteAbout the book, unfortunately I had to stop reading for a bit due to my exam sessions this month and the next one (in fact I'm slower than usual with blog's articles too). But when it's finished I will be able to work properly again and you will be the first to hear about the book ;)
What do you know about this picture?
ReplyDeletehttps://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81xJWb3vBHL.jpg
I often see it, but never got the original, it is supposedly depicting Ouchi Yoshihiro (1356-1400).
If it is truly follow the original, then it show really fast progression in the Nanbokucho Period, I though they only use Yoroi Hakama at the period and foot armor is not yet developed. The gauntlet also looks like the 16th century one.
O-dachi also appear during this period, I think.
I noticed that many paintings in Nanbokucho Period still show the O-yoroi in use and even until the 15th century. See the Yuki Kassen Ekotoba.
http://www.yuki-machiken.org/yuukigassen/gassen/s-gassen209.jpg
So when did they definitely change over to the Tosei Gusoku?
Did the O-yori set of the 14th-15th century can be called Tosei Gusoku because I often see them fighting on the ground wearing O-yoroi, so it may not be as cumbersome as I first thought.
Also why is the Samurai in the Yuki Kassen Ekotoba not wear Haidate as in the 1400 scroll? Is it because the O-yoroi cover much of the leg and the Samurai as archer on the ground are rarely hit on the thigh?
Hello Joshua!
DeleteActually it is the first time that I see this picture; it is supposed to depict a Nanbukocho warrior indeed if we assume that the words at the side are correct. However I am familiar with the horse armor which is the same of another 14th century depiction known as "Ninin Musha E - 二人武者絵". Even in that picture you could see the more classical haidate being worn and what look like to be kogake.
That's definitely a 14th century warrior, we can say that by the kasajikoro kabuto which is typical of this period.
Now, we do know that Oyoroi usage was in heavy decline shortly after the second Mongol invasion. That's because there was much more focus on foot combat, in which the Oyoroi could be a hindrance.
In addition to that, if we look at the preserved armors of the 14th and 15th century you would see a lot of Domaru and Haramaki but very few Oyoroi; the latter were usually heavily decorated and donated to shrines.
So you can occasionally see 14th century warriors wearing (shorter compared to other periods) Oyoroi if they are mounted but on the other hand we know that by the mid 14th century almost nobody used those armors in actual fight. The fact that you could see them in paintings is related to iconography rules: being depicted with Oyoroi was the equivalent of being the "superhero".
For example, here there is a (barely visible) close up of this 14th century warrior which I still have to find who is, whom is wearing a Do maru with a nodowa and a hanbo. The helmet is again 14th century styles, and he is also wearing tsubosode:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBNUs9AUAAAslbk.jpg
No doubt that by the 15th century, Oyoroi wasn't used anymore and we also start to see a consistent shift from Osode to tsubosode. In fact I won't take the "Yuki kassen ekotoba" as a reliable and detailed source (this is the main reason why you don't have haidate depicted) since there are better ones like the "Aki no Yonaga monogatari" of the same century more or less. This is your typical early/mid 15th century armor:
http://zenaida.travel/zdat14/wp-content/uploads/Armor-15th-century.jpg
The problem with Oyoroi is that, unlike the Domaru, it is not designed to be tailored at the waist and it is asymmetrical due to the waidate. If you are on horseback, since the armor is resting on the saddle, it won't be a problem. But on foot you will start to have issues with the big and flat frontal kusazuri hitting your legs every step and all the weight being carried by your shoulders.
Also, there are some loose parameters to use to see if an armor is a tosei gusoku or not; namely the period of production, if it was made after the mid/late 15th century, if it is a tachi do ( so if it has internal cross knots or if it is made by plates) which won't telescope on itself, if it has a higher muna ita (the top plate of breastplate is closer to the neck) and higher lateral plates as well and the kusazuri are made with 5 or 7 segments. Then you also have the additional pieces to hold a sashimono.
Those things if present could make the armor into a tosei gusoku.
Thank you for the answer, that pic
ReplyDeleteLately, I noticed that there are lot of depiction of Nanbokucho warriors with Odachi.
http://resistance333.web.fc2.com/html/nodati01.jpg
Why did it appear at this time?
Also how did the Mongol invasion trigger this change in the 14th century, fighting on foot, bigger combat and so on?
Why did it not happen earlier? I think the Mongol invasion cause the collapse of Kamakura shogunate and the war by the emperor use more people than before therefore less horse and more fighting on foot.
You are welcome!
DeleteYou might have also noticed that many depiction of horsemen of this period are quite similar, they all carry the odachi on their shoulder; another famous example is the portrait of Ashikaga Takauji.
Honestly I don't have a definitive answer on why these great swords were developed around the 14th century. My theory is that in this period cavalry warriors had to deal with much more aggressive infantry and they acted as some type of shock cavalry as well. So in order to deal with multiple enemies while on horseback, naginata were used over the bow. So they started to make big swords that could essentially fill the role of the naginata but were more durable due to havig more steel instead of a wooden long handle and they were also a status symbol as well, hence why they became popular.
These swords weren't sharpened entirely, so they were also used as some type of percussive weapon: in fact like the naginata, due to weight and point of balance, they could deliver very heavy blows that would likely damage through armor (but only if the head and the limbs are hit). According to Conlan they were also used as short spear as well to aim at the gaps of the armor.
The Mongol invasion triggered these development due to the fall of the shogunate as you pointed out and the explosion of a new period of civil unrest, so armies got bigger (which meant a higher number of foot soldiers).
In fact prior to the invasions, the 13th century was relatively peaceful.
Also the two invasions were the first instances were formations and infantry lines were used in Japan, so that played a role too. But more important is the fact that most battles of the 14th century were fought on uneven terrain, hills and forest that allowed the usage of early types of fortifications that prevented cavalry.
So it was natural to have a focus on foot combat in that period.
The return to foot to foot combat seems pretty natural, although strange since horse archers beat the infantry based early Japanese army and the Japanese adopted horse archery later on.
ReplyDeleteI think what prevent them from going back to mainly mounted combat would be the pikes and firearm as well as more numbers than before.
The Do maru and Haramaki are developed later than the Oyoroi, does that mean there are times everyone would wear Oyoroi even the lower class soldier?
Also do we have a time period where the Tanko stop being used?
After all they seem to be going back to where they started.
Do you remember about the example I show you of Korean and Kofun plate armor?
The 5th century one in Japan is made of horizontal strips, the 4th century one have vertical strips that create more solid surface.
Silla and Gaya use vertical plates and I found out that a 4th century one actually use large torso length and wide plates.
Armor piercing weapon and great swords exist in the Kofun Period.
The change to horse archery seems to be an interesting anomaly adopted from the continent.
Having plate in Tosei Gusoku did not prevent Sengoku period from doing mounted combat, unlike the often stated reason for Koreans and Japanese to shift to lamellar armor.
As you pointed out, horse archery beats infantry but only if the terrain is suited, the infantry is disorganized and the horse archers doesn't have to hold portions of land; all of these features were present in the Emishi-Yamato wars. With horse archers, there is a type of "raid warfare" where the horsemen are specialized in raids and skirmishes which worked extremely well in Japan until the 14th century, where battles started to be fought on early fortresses, mountains and infantry became more numerous.
DeleteYou are also right about the marginal role of the cavalry in the sengoku period, mainly due to pikes and shot. However, if used correctly a small cavalry unit could route an entire army as shown at Mikatagahara.
Cavalry remains the striking arms of the army for raids and sudden charges and in this role it was extremely effective.
Actually the Do maru was already around at the time of the Oyoroi; in fact both were developed from keiko armors. Oyoroi was much more expensive because it used more lamellae, it was longer and very heavy. However the domaru were improved when they were adopted by the upper class. Still you can see depictions of foot soldiers wearing Oyoroi in the scroll of the Heian and Kamakura period.
We do not have a precise date but it is assumed that Tanko production stopped during the 5th-6th century, since there are no evidences of tanko being produced after that period. Also while being made with horizontal plates, the Tanko used in Japan have a solid iron frame like a skeleton which further improved the strength. In fact early tanko armors were made with vertical plates too.
I have tried to explain with some theories of mine why mounted archery became the mainstream form of fighting in Japan within this quora post:
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-samurais-prefer-bows-to-lances-unlike-the-European-knights/answer/Luca-Nic-1?ch=10&share=ce5ce1b8&srid=3z2sJ
Also, I don't think lamellar armor became more common due to horse based combat; in my opinion it was a matter of cost. While it's true that lamellar is more comfortable on horseback than plate, this wasn't the driving factor as you pointed out since you can do quite well mounted with rigid type of armor. The thing is that Tanko required tailoring to the wearer to be effective, and requires more iron than lamellar all things considered. On the other hand, lamellar armor could be made of rawhide, and doesn't need to be as tailored as plate to be effective. This is in line with the reforms done in that period, where the national army was made by conscripted farmers.
Thanks to you, I now have a clearer image on the gap of Japanese armor knowledge. I now have a clear view to draw 14th-15th century armor.
DeleteThe gap that still remain is the Pre-Kofun Period, Asuka - early Heian Period and the early 16th century.
For Yayoi Period, other than the Chinese teracotta soldier style armor, there is this probably wooden armor often shown.
http://www.gondo.com/gyarari/photo/wepon/pic/b1.jpg
http://istorja.ru/uploads/monthly_2016_03/yoroiseate.JPG.647492ce440b7cafa0eee1a57a21b528.JPG
Could we really determine what Yayoi period warrior use?
The bodkin point Kofun spear I talk about are these
https://image.tnm.jp/image/1024/E0017278.jpg
https://image.tnm.jp/image/1024/E0043137.jpg
and the Korean armor I said to have large solid plates is this 4th century
http://img.newspim.com/news/2018/12/19/1812191013424530.jpg
this look similar to a 5 section Char Aina
https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/images/hb/hb_48.92.1.jpg
Maybe with the use of heavy armor, narrow armor piercing weapon are used in this period, but that does not explain Dao type sword appear too. I think in the formation the spear is used more.
It could be a nice topic in itself, if the artifact aren't too view.
I also found that several cultures have their own variation of Estoc. I am interested in this Japanese weapon, the text in Pinterest said that this is called Tetsu Uma Muchi meaning iron horse whip.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5a/7c/1d/5a7c1d0b5191a22155d0300e48716db4.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9c/74/d4/9c74d41898df8763b4d9d74c8016527a.jpg
I wonder if it is really used or just another Edo period weapon.
You're welcome, I'm glad that I could help!
DeleteI'm planning to draw a series of sketches of the armors worn in Japan for every time period, but not until my skill and tools will improve.
Those timeframes are quite hard; I suggest you to look at the latest book of Trevor Absolon for the Yayoi and Asuka period, it is worth it (not so much on later period armor tough, as I have pointed out in my notes on Japanese armor).
Early 16th century Japanese armor look like late 15th c. but with more focus on plate and more sugake odoshi, I believe.
Yayoi period is very hard; it seems that those armors you posted were actually made of wood but we do not know if rawhide equivalent existed; it is generally assumed that the wooden ones were ceremonial and not inteded to be used.
Again Absolon does a good job within that time frame (at least compared to other english sources available).
Well although suit of armor that could cover almost entirely the body existed, the majority of soldiers didn't have them so a dao type of swords was perfectly fine for war. In addition to that, dao swords are much easier to use due to the single edge for conscripted troops; this was at least the reason why it was adopted over the Jian in China.
But as you pointed out, spears and shields were the main weapons of this period.
Well the uma muchi although it look pointy and is made of iron/steel is a whip used to steer the horse rather than a weapon. In fact they are usually quite short compared to something like a rapier or an estoc. You can used it as a weapon but it was meant for other jobs.
Thank you for the information.
ReplyDeleteI'm currently focusing on the late 15th century-late 16th century Japan.
What I want to know is
when laminar armor changed to rigid Okegawa Do and other rigid cuirass,
when the tubular Haidate replaced by the Haidate that cover the front part,
when the thumb plate of the gauntlet start to appear,
when the plates in the Kote changed into smaller plates linked by mail,
and when Menpo start to be worn.
I notice that at the beginning of the 16th century, most Samurai portrait have lamellar or false scale armor with large amount of laces (when it should had been simplified) and kawara Haidate. The Sode is always portrayed as large like in O-yoroi, even though Tsubo Sode should have been worn.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sait%C5%8D_Masayoshi.JPG
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a2/35/a0/a235a09f893173aa96600276c82396e7--japanese-prints-japanese-art.jpg
However in later 16th century, we start seeing the familiar Tosei Gusoku armor.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Twenty-Four_Riders_of_Kuroda
By the 17th century, we see that it already change completely to mostly mail and plate on the arm and thigh, probably for lightening the armor and simplify construction.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9f/Kanamori_Shigeyori.jpg/1920px-Kanamori_Shigeyori.jpg
Some portrait still show Kawara Haidate being used until the late 16th century.
https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB:Kira_Yoriyasu.jpg
This is a 17th century real armor for comparison. We can see that it still has Wakibiki and the construction seems more solid than later Edo Period one, but it still use lamellar or false scale for some reason.
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/25639
About warfare in the 14th century you said that it involve more fighting in fortifications than before, didn't Japan have the ability to built fortifications since its beginning?
DeleteI'm talking about the ring of fortress built after the Battle of Baekgang, I think it is very impressive.
600s Dazaifu Water Fortress
http://i.imgur.com/CmhsqYA.jpg
Shikizan Castle
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5a/fd/89/5afd8925de746fa3b4e6f6c1b08d8486.jpg
Azuchi Castle
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dDm47t-iviQ/VpFc3CG5RSI/AAAAAAAABeU/KqKQ6lrhCnM/s1600-r/%25E5%25AE%2589%25E5%259C%259F%25E5%259F%258E%25E8%25B2%259E%25E4%25BA%25AB%25E5%258F%25A4%25E5%259B%25B3.jpg
It could be an interesting topic for your article too, because the often talked about castle is just the period with tall keeps.
Well as you might already know there aren't precise date whit pre modern technology; it took several decades for something to become outdated so it was totally normal to see 15th century Domaru being used in the mid 16th century. With that being said, my educated guesses are:
Delete1) laminar laced Mogami do started to be riveted and early Okegawa do (so rigid and solid plates) started to emerge around the 1515-1530. The more rounded shape emerged in the 1550, before armor had more tapered and tigh waist and look liked this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DtffmAYU4AU3Lmm?format=jpg&name=large
By the 1560s the classic Okegawa shape was already around and the other styles started to appear as well but I will write on the history of each style in separated articles.
2) Hodo haidate were probably replaced at the end of the 15th century.
Kawara and ita haidate started to be a thing in the late 15th/early 16th century I believe; mail ones like the kusari/oda haitade on the other hand are the evolution of the hizayoroi already found in the 14th century.
3) The thumb on kote I believe started to be a thing at the end of the 14th century. They become mainstream at the end of the 15th c.
4) Small plates on the upper arm started to be adopted probably in the mid 15th/16th and become fashionable in the 16th century.
I think it's related to the usage of tsubo and tosei sode, since they cover that area.
5) Around the 16th century although there are evidences of usage in the 14th century as I have wrote in my article.
Again, there aren't neat periods or dates.
Lamellar armor stayed popular and was still used throughout the 16th century actually, both the old and the new styles. Also portraits follow some rule of iconography, you rarely see warriors being depicted without Osode for example.
(Also to avoid misunderstandings, kawara haidate are these ones:
https://pin.it/6nxu2md2axevzw
The tubular haidate are called hodo haidate).
In fact many armors might have been ceremonial.
Armor had also the function of being an object of fashion; lamellar was kept for the same reason you have kawari kabuto in the 16th century. It's more cultural related than anything else.
The armor of the Met is also likely to be a composite; it has a kyubi and sedan no ita, a sign of the Oyoroi revival of the 18th century.
Japanese castles deserve an article on their own. Fortress and castles have been made since the Yayoi period for sure, but the 14th century saw much more sieges compared to the wars of the previous periods. That's likely a matter of circumstances and context rather than anything else.
DeleteThank you for answering my question.
ReplyDeleteI forgot to ask about the Kogake, but in my opinion it is 15th century.
How old is the cuirass you linked to? Is it an early Okegawa Do that stil retain its 15th century shape?
Another would be when did the various armor that cover the gap like Wakibiki start to appear, maybe in the 15th century.
Have you seen this X-ray image of Japanese armor
https://harwood-international-wqtk.squarespace.com/blog/2016/7/25/exclusive-look-at-inside-the-armor2
It is interesting to see that the Sode is mostly leather in construction, but since it is Edo armor it is probably just for saving material.
I just realized that I never asked this, but since the article is about the O-yoroi.
I heard that Samurai ride pointing their face down and the top of their helmet forward toward the enemy to deflect arrow, the Shikoro and the Sode helped too.
When did they start doing this?
There is a Chinese Liao or Jin Dynasty that have a very thick construction, 5 mm at the thinnest and 1 cm at the thickest part.
In comparison, there is a 15th century Gothic armor with average 2 mm thickness and the thickest part is 4.4 mm.
The data:
http://i.stack.imgur.com/HHsaP.jpg
Maybe the Chinese also use this method to deflect arrow by pointing a very thick helmet to deflect arrow, the form of a helmet is always very deflective.
Heian Period also have studs which I don't know the use for.
Talking about helmet, what do you think about this helmet, it is pretty much a Japanese great helm if it is authentic, is it a fake?
https://www.pinterest.de/pin/320670435958179539/
http://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/opere-arte/schede/6c070-00669/
Kogake as we know them today are 16th century, but there are early versions dated to the 14th century as depicted by the Nininmusha-e which only have a single plate and don't cover the fingers.
DeleteThe cuirass I linked is probably early to mid 16th century.
Additional armor pieces started to be developed around the 14th century; in this period you have kogake, nodowa, mail used to fill the gaps etc.
That kind of construction is called kanemaze and was occasionally used to save weight and material as you pointed out.
Well I'm not aware of any technique that involves using the helmet that way at least in the Heian/kamakura period. We do know that this kind of tactic was likely used during the sengoku period because of the shape of the mabizashi which was very steep and occasionally reinforced.
On the other hand, Heian period helmets have a tehen on their top which is something that you don't want to face the enemy with.
Another more reasonable way (but again it's an educated guess) to use the helmet to deflect arrows is to look either right or left; in that way you will use the big fukigaeshi to deflect them. A better way do to so is to turn the whole body a little, in order to let the Osode facing your enemy.
I have some pictures in my article about shields that explain it.
Also there aren't practical reasons for the very big rivets on early kabuto as far as I know.
Are you sure that those Chinese lamellae are that thick? 5mm is already quite thick if it's iron, 1 cm could be obtained only with overlapping and it's going to be super heavy in my opinion.
That helmets doesn't look fake but I'm not really able to tell it just by a picture. It looks a 100% Edo period oddity indeed.
The 5mm-1cm thickness is for helmet, not lamellar.
DeleteThere are Tang Dynasty lamellar armor find which have 2.2 mm as thinnest and 2.8 mm as thickest lamellae.
Seeing that those thickness seems excessive, there are opinions that it is actually for defense not against melee weapon, but against crossbow.
The Japanese create the Sode and wide Shikoro to intercept or deflect the arrow midway.
About the Sode I noticed that Eskimo and Siberian armor also have large shield on their upper arm, some Korean and Japanese Kofun also have wings (sometimes hinged) which seems to be used for this purpose as well.
The Edo Period show the best the Japanese can make, if we ignore the decoration, however it happen after large scale battles are over.
Seeing that they can make articulated animals from plates certainly means that they can make plate armor if they want to, but choose not to.
Well for a helmet it might be reasonable, although it will still be very heavy. I'm aware of a Japanese 16th century kabuto with that thickness.
DeleteYes the Osode worked like that and I've seen some similar design in those armors too.
Although it is Edo period, the armors of that period were built on the knowledge (and technology) of the 16th century. There are some kote that use laminated plates instead of mail for articulation, the most famous example is the Tengu armor in Boston (if I recall correctly). According to some members of the Japanese armor society, said style originated in Owari during the 16th century, and it might have been more popular than what we think, considering how much survived of that period.
It's a similar design to Chinese arm armor used during the Ming.
However we do know that armorers started to make iron articulated animals, which highlight the skill of those artisans; indeed, if they wanted to make articulated plates more common, they would have done it.
Ainu armor looks a lot like dali armor and both resemble a primitive version of o-yoroi . Tribes in southern and central China still have this kind of what might be called proto-yoroi. There are numerous connections between the yayoi people and the baiyue peoples: Teeth blackening, archaeological finds, DNA, linguistics and the earliest form of sushi, a dish today known as narezushi. The ainu themselves are descended from the satsumon culture, a merger of the Yayoi–Kofun and the Jōmon cultures.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt that traditional Ainu armor is a direct product of the early Keiko models, the forerunner of the Oyoroi. Those types of lamellar armor were introduced by Korea and China and were quite popular among the Emishi people, which were indeed related to the Ainu.
DeleteThere is indeed a clear link in this case between armor used in China and Korea to this particular suit which didn't change that much given the relative isolation of the Ainu people.