Defensive Armor of the Archaic Period 179 



the venture of dragging in the terms cha (No. 127) and ye ("leaf "), 

 which are peculiar to the Han period, but which did not exist with this 

 meaning and with reference to armor in the age of the Chou. These 

 two terms refer to laminae or plates of hide or metal reinforcing armor 

 (see pp. 196, 210), and it will be seen that this type of armor springs 

 up only from under the Han. It certainly had not come into existence 

 under the Chou, as proved by the description of the armor given above 

 after the Chou li, in which those terms are absent. Again, it is an ab- 

 surdity to speak of an armor consisting of seven, six, or five laminae or 

 plates, as these are of small dimensions, and a very large number of 

 them is required to make a suit of armor. l The verdict of the Chinese 

 scholars must therefore be repealed. It is solely to the very text of the 

 Chou li, which is sound and sane, that we must appeal for a correct 

 understanding of the structure of this cuirass. 



We can understand, in my estimation, only that the suits were com- 

 posed of seven, six, and five superposed layers or thicknesses of hide, 

 respectively, as in fact hide armor has been produced. Then the whole 

 passage becomes intelligible. There is a sensible gradation of three 

 coats, regulated according to the quality believed to inhere in the hide. 

 That of the two-horned rhinoceros ranks lowest in strength, therefore 

 requiring seven layers, 2 and lasts only a hundred years. That of the 

 single-horned rhinoceros, which is the stronger animal, is superior, 

 therefore requiring only six layers, and yet it will last two hundred 

 years. That of both kinds combined is the best and strongest of all, 

 therefore demanding only five layers, and will last three hundred years 

 (see also p. 172). The hide, accordingly, was cut up in horizontal see- 

 to unite, combine, to assemble," whence the significance "layer, stratum " is doubtless 

 derived; whereas there is no evidence that it was ever understood in the sense of 

 "piece." Couvreur explains it as a numerative of the pieces of an armor, and cites 

 from Ts'ien Han shu, "an armor composed of three pieces" (san shu chi kia). It 

 is inconceivable that such a device ever existed. It certainly was a hide armor 

 consisting of three layers of skin. A. Conrady (Eine indochinesische Causativ- 

 Denominativ-Bildung, p. 165) has succeeded well in tracing the etymology of the 

 word shu. The ancient pronunciation, according to him, was zuk (Japanese suk); 

 the primeval form to be supposed is grog, identical with the Tibetan root grog in 

 s-grog-pa ("to tie"), s-grog ("rope, strap"), and grogs ("fellow, friend"). This 

 derivation also sheds light on the Chinese word shu assuming the significance "strip 

 or layer of hide or leather." 



1 It is therefore an anachronism when the passage in the text of the Chou li 

 (Giles, No. 4437) is translated, "In coats of mail, it is desirable for the plates to fit 

 evenly." Anything like plates is then out of the question. What is meant in this 

 passage is (and it is so understood by the Chinese commentators) that the hide used 

 in the cuirasses should not wrinkle. Biot very aptly translates, "On la revet, et 

 on demande qu'il n'y ait pas d'in£galit£s dans les coutures (qu'elles ne grimacent 

 pas)." 



2 A cuirass of seven thicknesses is mentioned in the biography of I Shen (T'ang 

 shu, Ch. 170, p. 2). 



