History of Chain Mail and Ring Mail 243 



same name we meet this armor in the soldiery of the Indian Moghuls. 1 

 It is figured among the sketches of the Ain I Akbari, a history of the 

 Emperor Akbar, written in 1597 by Abul Fazl Allami (1551-1602). 2 

 As this work has now become exceedingly rare, three illustrations from 

 it are here reproduced from a copy in the writer's possession (Fig. 38). 

 They are instructive from more than one point of view. First, they 

 furnish actual proof of Persian chain mail, as well as helmet, having 

 been transmitted from Persia into India. Second, as regards the 

 manner of drawing, it will be noticed that the coat in Fig. 38 b is striking- 

 ly similar to the Chinese sketch of ring mail in Fig. 41. Both convey 

 the impression of scale armor, but are explained as, and intended for, 

 chain mail and ring mail respectively. 3 It is exceedingly difficult to 

 produce a good sketch of either; and it is interesting to note that two 

 draughtsmen, independent of each other, have had recourse to the 

 same mechanical means of representing them. They teach, as many 

 other cases, that caution and criticism are necessary in diagnosing 

 types of armor after pictorial or other designs. 4 The helmet (Fig. 38 a) 

 with nasal and coif of mail (mighfar) is the same as that still extant in 

 India, and from there conveyed to Tibet (Plate XXVIII). Irvine 

 (p. 565) describes the zirih as a coat of mail with mail sleeves, composed 

 of steel links, the coat reaching to the knees. There are six specimens in 

 the Indian Museum. Armor in the collection of the Nawab Wazir at 

 Lakhnau is described in 1785 as follows: "The armor is of two kinds, 

 either of helmets and plates of steel to secure the head, back, breast, 

 and arms, or of steel network, put on like a shirt, to which is attached a 



1 W. Irvine, The Army of the Indian Moghuls {Journal Royal As. Soc, 1896, 

 P- 565)- 



2 Translation of H. Blochmann, Vol. I, Plate XIII (Calcutta, 1873). 



3 Irvine (/. c, p. 564) remarks that from this figure it may be inferred that, in 

 a more specific sense, baktar or bagtar was the name for fish-scale armor. Yet Bloch- 

 mann's explanation of this figure, according to the Ain I Akbari, is "chain mail with 

 breastplate (bagtar)." 



4 Chinese sketches of defensive armor certainly are far from being good or accu- 

 rate; on the contrary, they are purely conventional in style, a fixed and ready-made 

 motive or model being employed for each type of armor. Yet they are not much 

 worse than corresponding designs from India, Persia, and mediaeval Europe. At all 

 events, they are interesting, and in many respects even instructive. Whatever their 

 defects may be, if we are willing to understand the symbolic language of the draughts- 

 men, their productions allow us in the majority of cases to recognize what type of 

 armor is intended by them, in the same manner as inferences as to the type of armor 

 intended may be deduced from the terminology of the language. In cases where no 

 actual specimens are at our disposal, the Chinese illustrations may still claim a pri- 

 mary importance; where we have specimens to study, as in the case of chain mail and 

 plate armor, the sketches of the Chinese afford opportunity for an instructive com- 

 parison; and for this reason I have drawn upon these sources also. They may render 

 us essential assistance in interpreting the types of armor represented in statuary 

 and painting. 



