Introduction of brigandine to China
It is generally accepted that Chinese armies adopted brigandine armour due to
Mongol influence, although curiously this seems to have only happened after
the fall of Mongol-ruled Yuan Dynasty. To elaborate, there are scant few
records that suggest Yuan army made use of brigandine armour at all, and most
"evidences" seem to come from Qing and Joseon brigandines in Japan's Mongolian
Invasion Historical Museum being erroneously attributed to Yuan period.
Moreover, written records and a few armour finds from early Ming period also
indicate that early Ming army was still predominantly equipped with lamellar
armours.
The earliest written record that explicitly mentions brigandine armour comes from an armour regulation found in Collected Statutes of the Ming Dynasty (《大明會典》), dated to the ninth year of the reign of Hongzi Emperor (1496 A.D.), although the wordings of the statute suggest that brigandine armour was already known in China for some time already, albeit probably only in the not-too-distant past.
![]() |
Ming soldiers wearing brigandines, from 'Zhen Wu Ling Ying Tu Ce (《真武靈應圖冊》)'. |
Another possible evidence of early Ming brigandine comes from its depictions in
Zhen Wu Ling Ying Tu Ce (《真武靈應圖冊》), a collection of daoist painted
scrolls. Historians are still undecided on whether this scroll collection should
be dated to the reign of Yongle Emperor (i.e. early 15th century) or to the
twilight years of the Ming Dynasty (i.e. 17th century). Nevertheless, since it
is known that Ming brigandine underwent significant style changes during
Ming-Qing transition period, and yet the armours depicted here don't
reflect the change, earlier date is more likely to be the correct one.
Thus, given the available evidence, at best an informed guess can be made that
brigandine armour was introduced to China some time in the fifteenth century.
Styles and designs of Ming brigandines
1. Brigandine coat
![]() |
Many variations in designs found on Ming brigandines (click to enlarge). |
A Ming brigandine was a suit of armour with iron (or low carbon steel) plates fixed to a cloth cover from the inside using copper rivets. All Ming brigandines came in the form of a loose-fitting, single-breasted coat that somewhat resembles a modern gilet, albeit with huge variations in collar designs, sleeve designs, coat lengths, rivet patterns, and of course, colours.
![]() |
Ming infantry kitted in various types of brigandines. |
![]() |
Ming cavalry kitted in various types of brigandines. |
Nearly all variations of Ming brigandines were used by infantry and cavalry alike, although naturally foot soldiers would have different preferences and requirements from their mounted counterparts, causing some styles of brigandines to be more prevalent than others among certain troop types. Broadly speaking, for much of the Ming period foot soldiers preferred to wear short sleeved, hip length to knee length armours alone, whereas mounted troops preferred sleeveless or cap-sleeved brigandines of either waist length or ankle length, often combined with additional armour items such as Bi Fu (臂縛) and armorued skirts.
1.5. Auxiliary armour
![]() |
Common Ming period auxiliary armours of brigandine construction (click to enlarge). |
Brigandine also replaced lamellar in the construction of various auxiliary armours during Ming period. The most common brigandine auxiliary armour was the aventail of a helmet, which came in two main varieties: with or without separate cheek pieces. By the twilight years of Ming Dynasty, brigandine throat guard, underarm protector and front armour attachment also came into widespread use due to the introduction of a new style of brigandine armour (see below).
There's also some pictorial evidences that suggest that rectangular brigandine throat guard, of the type commonly associated with Qing armour, was actually already in use during Ming period.
2. Composite armour
![]() |
Ming cavalry kitted in composite brigandine armours. |
A rarer form of Ming brigandine seemingly reserved for mounted elite troops and guards, the so-called "composite armour" appeared to be a sleeveless, ankle-length brigandine coat reinforced with a different type of armour at the upper torso, which may be of scale, lamellar, brigandine, and possibly mail construction. It's yet unknown whether the upper torso armour was directly integrated into the brigandine coat, or simply a separate partial armour worn on top of a common brigandine coat.
![]() |
Various forms of armours in use during late Ming period, from 'Bing Lu (《兵錄》)'. Third and fourth armour from the left are composite brigandines. |
Late Ming period military treatise Bing Lu (《兵錄》) also contains two illustrations of ankle-length composite brigandines, one is a brigandine with lamellar skirt, another is a lamellar coat with brigandine skirt.
3. Late Ming period two-piece brigandine
![]() |
Several Ming cavalry in two-piece brigandines, image cropped from 'Xing Jun Tu (《行軍圖》)', a late Ming copy of an earlier painting. |
A new style of Ming brigandine largely supplanted (but likely did not completely phase out) older styles of armours during the twilight years of the Ming Dynasty. The new style consisted of a helmet with assorted brigandine aventail and a curved triangular throat guard, a sleeveless hip-length coat and an enlarged armoured skirt (often in mismatched colours), a pair of large underarm protectors, a square-shaped front armour attachment, as well as a pair of segmented Bi Fu armguards to make a whole set.
After the downfall of Ming Dynasty, the ascendant Qing Dynasty inherited the armour design, and the style eventually evolved into the iconic Qing brigandine upon further modifications.
The variation in styles of brigandine would explain why a lot of art and reconstruction of southern brigandine have a radically different riveting scheme compared to the longer Northern brigandine coats. I originally thought it was due to artist error/simplification. Do you think there were variations in the size and shape of the plates used as well? The Composite brigandine armor reminds me of Koxinga’s Iron men armor, perhaps they were thinking of a similar concept as well, especially given the arrows vs armor tests that show that a single layer of brigandine is insufficient in stopping arrows
ReplyDeleteIf you mean the Justin Ma test, I think I've read somewhere that the the tested plates (0.8mm manganese steel) may be too hard and too brittle.
DeleteThere were definitely variations of plates although most I've seen are squarish. I've read that brigandine rivet pattern changed over time, no idea if they had north/south/regional style divide.
Ah yeah, some aspects of the armor I did find a little iffy, my recollection is that they were using more flat plates, though im aware Chinese brigandine plates were often rounded/curved.
DeleteAs for the riveting scheme, it seems from what Ive seen that many of the Northern long coat brigandine and Qing era brigandine have about 3 rivets per plate, whereas a lot of southern brigandine seem to have 2 rivets per plate, sharing a rivet with the plate on either side. That being said, for the Southern short brigandine, these observations are purely based on art and not on any surviving examples.
I believed 'Xing Jun Tu (《行軍圖》)' was drawn in 1643 year, one year before the end of Ming dynasty. So it should be an late Ming copy of an earlier Ming painting.
ReplyDeleteMy bad, it was painted by early Qing painters, but the painting itself was done in 1643.
ReplyDeleteCould you talk more about early Ming armor? You know, before they mass equiped birgandine. Most people think they wore lamellar during that period. But lamellar itself has so many variations, and I could not find any relic or painting of armor during early Ming.
DeleteUnfortunately there are far fewer information regarding earlier Ming armour compared to brigandine, Yongle period (15th century) was already stretching it pretty far. But I will see what I can find.
DeleteI don't know if someone has tried to date it (I suppose someone has), but maybe the fact that Nurhaci's brigandine is a simple coat like the ones in 平番得胜图 and Hung Taiji's armor is like the ones in 行軍圖 may reflect that the style appeared in the late 1620's-early 1630's.
ReplyDeleteThey do reflect the style change. Both Nurhaci's armour and Hong Taiji's armour were replicas created by Qianlong Emperor based on the originals (now lost) though.
DeleteWhat strikes me about these paintings of Ming brigandine is their resemblance to Timurid and Ottoman armor. From helmets down to the boots.
ReplyDeleteMing and Timurid had plenty of cultural exchange, Timurid miniatures are very heavily influenced by Chinese paintings for example. It is possible that brigandine was introduced through this exchange.
DeleteThe only difference is the nose guard. From Ottoman to Mughal, nose guards were common but the Chinese never seem to have nose guards on their helmets. Is it because Barbarians had bigger noses than the Han Chinese I wonder?
DeleteThere are quite a few difference too, like Timurid had brigandines not opened from the front.
DeleteI'm curious. How would you rate the early Ming military and Timur the Lame's army? Military technology tends to be adopted across cultures and states as a solider is not stupid, he copies and steals what works best on the battlefield. So in some ways the Ming and Timur's army are very similar in many ways, but which one is more formidable you think? It's fascinating how Zhu Yuanzhang and Timur's careers mirrored each others so closely, their militaries also mirrored each other as well.
DeleteMing had a significant firearms and numbers advantage.
DeleteI have a question about the auxiliary armor labelled as "small armored skirt". Is it truly a skirt, or is it more akin to the Zhan Qun (戰裙) of the Quan Tie Jia? It doesn't look like a skirt in the images whereas the other ones labelled as skirts do.
ReplyDeleteI use the term rather loosely, but for one-piece armour the "skirt" is more like a real skirt, while for two-piece armour it is like Zhan Qun/apron.
ReplyDelete