Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
wolflance

Reconstructed Han Dynasty clothing

Recommended Posts

I am not sure how applicable a Xiognnu unit as a stand-in for Hun unit. Even though Xiongnu and Huns are theorized to be related, they probably picked up a lot of Western influence during their transformation (if true) into the Hun, and thus would have been quite different.

 

Xiongnu that fought the Chinese used pretty much the same equipment as the Chinese - straight single-edged ring pommel dao, spear & bow etc. They did have some unique bronze weapon design.

 

Edited by wolflance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

What are most notable differences between Sarmatians, Huns and Xiognu

  • buldings
  • warfare
  • units

Xiongnu did not appear to have cataphracts,  and used mostly Chinese-influenced equipment (except their bow, which is Scythian). Although there's some mentions about Xiongnu infantry, they hardly ever used foot soldiers. So they were (generally speaking) an entirely mounted force utilizing highly mobile hit-and-run and other nomad tactics.


No idea on their building since I don't think any survived. No idea on the Huns/Sarmatians either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

You can describe what was found in that city?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongwancheng

Not much, only the city wall survived relatively intact, plus some foundations of palace remain. Most buildings in the city were probably wooden, but there indeed have brick remains, so at least some must've been made of brick.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly our nomas must be wooden, specially if they work with  those mercenaries forming scales with their shields and making militar wooden fortresses. "The Legion of Crassus".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Mostly our nomas must be wooden, specially if they work with  those mercenaries forming scales with their shields and making militar wooden fortresses. "The Legion of Crassus".

You mean the rumored lost legion of Crassus that end up as mercenaries for Xiongnu and fought the Chinese?  The evidence for that is shaky at best, and there's another guy theorized that they were Greek Hoplites instead of Roman Legionaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2018 at 3:07 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

http://www.absolutechinatours.com/china-travel/Han-Dynasty.html

Han-Character-on-the-banner.jpg

Huatuo-Han-Dynasty.jpg

Huo Tuo, Han Dynasty physician who used anesthesia to numb pains.

I will urge caution about using that flag. It is most likely inaccurate (just look at the halberd head!).

Hua Tuo was Three-Kingdoms period, so may or may not out of the timeframe.

Edited by wolflance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wolflance said:

(just look at the halberd head!).

I'm not an expert on China (not by a long shot), but what's wrong with the ji (dagger-axe with spear)?

Spoiler

Ge_and_ji.thumb.jpg.77c82e47f24e2357db57d984a134ffd5.jpg

0b59a70b42030c4dbc4af4f6a906e452.jpg.fc292b3331db58600c809c858564bc6e.jpg

Chinese_dagger-axe_and_related_polearms_svg.thumb.png.4de70ae578842f4ec689a56a754498ca.png

 

And mentioned in 13 BC Han Equipment Account book: http://historum.com/asian-history/45323-han-dynasty-donghai-military-inventory.html

 

"During February 1993 some medicine harvesters stumbled upon a grave, inside which lies a military account book. It was titled "The Military Storehouse of YongShi's 4th year Equipment Account Book" 《武库永始四年兵车器集簿》. This puts the date at 13 BC. People say that this was their military inventory for Donghai commandery. However, from the account, it seems that the Han had an unreasonably huge amount of equipment for such a sparsely populated region. In fact to me it appears that this would actually be the military inventory's entire total, rather than the amount for just one commandery. Any more info would be appreciated. 

I have taken the trouble of translating:

Bows&Crossbow: 
--------Crossbow: 537,707 (imperial owned: 11,181)
--------Bows: 77,521
--------Subtotal: 615,228
Projectiles:
--------Crossbow bolts: 11,458,424 (imperial owned: 34,265)
--------Imperial owned arrows: 1,199,316 (imperial owned: 511)
--------Subtotal: 12,657,740
Armor:
--------Jia Armor: 142,701 (imperial owned: 34,265)
--------Iron thigh clothing: 255, 1 pair of unique ones
--------Kai armor: 63,324
--------Armored thigh clothing: …ten thousand 563
--------Iron lamellar armor: 587,299, 
--------Leather armor is 14 jin [7.5 lbs]
Helmets:
--------Helmets: 98,226
--------Horse armor: 5,330
Shields: 
--------Shields: 102,551
Polearms:
--------Bronze Ge: 632 (imperial owned: 563)
--------Spear: 52,555 (imperial owned: 2377) 
--------Imperial owned sheng: 943
--------Pi sword-staff: 451,222 (imperial owned: 1421)
--------Ji halberd: 6,634
--------YoFang: 78,393
--------Duan: 24,167
--------Subtotal: 614,546
Blades:
--------Sword: 99,905 (imperial owned: 4)
--------JingLu Dagger: 24,804 
--------Saw…sabre: 30,098
--------Sabre: 156,135
--------Great Sabre: 127 (232)
--------Subtotal: 311,069
Axes:
--------Iron axe: 1132 (136)
Battle Carts:
--------ChengYuZheng chariots, drum chariots, 
--------WuGang chariots:18 
--------Soldier’s ChengYu chariots: 24
--------Interconnected Crossbow Carriage: 564
--------Charging chariot: 37
--------Drum Chariot: 4
--------Battle Chariot: 1
--------…chariot: 564
--------…chariot: 1
--------WuGang strong crossbow chariot: 10
--------ZuiBi chariot: 1
--------Battle chariot: 502
--------3 wheeled soldier’s chariot: 1 (168)
--------Tracking: 9
--------High…chariot: 11
--------….chariot: 7
--------….chariot…chariot: 2133
--------Su…heavy chariot: 1993
--------Soldier’s…chariot: 677
--------He chariot: 2
--------FeiLow temporary chariot: 2
--------Subtotal: 7174 (imperial owned 42 + 7132)

As you can see this would be enough to arm an army of ~1 million men. How could so much equipment be localized within one commandery? Wouldn't it be unreasonable to have such a huge surplus of equipment, unless if it was for the entire empire? From the equipment list the only thing that seems lacking would be the Wugang chariots and helmets, if the inventory was for the entire empire. Weiqing was said to have sniped a Xiongnu chieftan with such a chariot, and this would be unlikely to have happened unless if the Wugang chariots were common. However here the list shows only 18 Wugang chariots and 10 Strong Crossbow Wugang chariots. It was recorded that there were only 98,226 helmets while on the other hand there is enough body armor for 793,324 men.

This is the original text I translated from:
弩弓:弩537707(乘舆11181),弓77521,小计615228
矢:弩矢11458424(乘舆34265),弓乘舆1199316(乘舆511),小计12657740
甲铠:甲142701(乘舆379),乘舆铁股衣225两1奇,铠63324,股甲衣□□□万563,铁甲札587299,革甲14斤。
头盔:(左革右是)暓98226(乘舆678),马甲(左革右是)暓5330
防牌:盾102551(乘舆2650)
枪:铜戈632(乘舆563),矛52555(乘舆2377),乘舆鈒943,鈹451222(乘舆1421),戟6634,有方78393,锻24167,小计614546
刀剑:剑99905(乘舆4),泾路匕首24804,锯□刀30098,刀156135,大刀127(232),小计311069
斧:铁斧1132(136)
战车:乘舆钲车、鼓车、武攠车18乘,乘舆兵车24乘。
连弩车564乘,冲车37辆,将军鼓车10乘,轻车301乘,将军兵车比二千将□鼓车116乘,□□车180乘,钲车8乘,鼓车6乘,战车1乘,□□车 564乘,□车1乘,武刚强弩车10乘,嘴弊车1乘,战车502乘,三轮兵车1乘(168),踪⒐瓿?乘,高□车11乘,□□车7两,□□车□车2133 两,素□重车1993乘,兵□车677乘,合车2乘,蜚楼行临车2乘。小计7174乘(乘舆42+7132)

If anyone could noticed faults in my translations, that would be appreciated too."

 

Edited by Sundiata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sign on the banner is 漢 (汉 in simplified). It is said "hàn" in modern chinese and signifies the Han Dynasty, so I believe the flag is accurate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2018 at 5:53 PM, Sundiata said:

I'm not an expert on China (not by a long shot), but what's wrong with the ji (dagger-axe with spear)?

  Reveal hidden contents

Ge_and_ji.thumb.jpg.77c82e47f24e2357db57d984a134ffd5.jpg

 

That kind of design was used until the end of Qin Dynasty only. By Han period, bronze two-piece (spear + dagger-axe) halberd was largely replaced by slender, one-piece iron halberd head. It's in the lower right of your first image.

Han halberd was more slender, streamlined, vicious, but also kinda ugly. Still, it was what it was.

KhOmFcW.jpg

 

On 5/3/2018 at 6:39 PM, wackyserious said:

@wolflance What material is the lamellar made of? Was it standard to paint it black?

Either iron or leather (actually hide is more correct). Both were lacquered black.

 

16 hours ago, Arcana33 said:

The sign on the banner is 漢 (汉 in simplified). It is said "hàn" in modern chinese and signifies the Han Dynasty, so I believe the flag is accurate.

No. The character itself is problematic (I don't think that kind of font style existed back then - it's a modern font and clearly printed from a computer), and it's likely that they didn't actually put the character "Han" on their flags  (none of the subsequent dynasties/modern China did, either). 

(I think Roman wouldn't write  “SPQR” on their flags either).

Edited by wolflance
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2018 at 7:00 AM, wackyserious said:

@wolflance

Opinion on this armor, can we use them for the Han faction?

Although the armor is described to be a Nanyue armor replica.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nanyue_Armour.JPG

Nanyue_Armour.JPG

Nanyue was not exactly a part of Han Empire at this point of time, but there are Han (and Qin, for that matter) terracottas dressed in similar type of sleeveless armor, so I say go for it.

a6Hgo33.jpg

(Notice that his armor covers more than the typical Han Dynasty "pectoral" armor)

 

 

Oh, there is also a similar sleeveless lamellar suit belonged to early Eastern Han period Xianbei, so I think Xiongnu minifaction can also use it.

\R2X7ayI.jpg

Early Eastern Han Xianbei armor, replica. It's almost identical to Han armor.

 

Edited by wolflance
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2018 at 2:45 AM, wolflance said:

"No. The character itself is problematic (I don't think that kind of font style existed back then - it's a modern font and clearly printed from a computer), and it's likely that they didn't actually put the character "Han" on their flags  (none of the subsequent dynasties/modern China did, either). "

I think you're right about the habit of putting the dynastic name on flags/battle standards.  However the font on that flag definitely existed by the Han Dynasty. However, the script style on the flag is called Clerical Script, which DID exist during the Han and was in fact the main script style of the period.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2018 at 9:26 AM, pissybits said:

I think you're right about the habit of putting the dynastic name on flags/battle standards.  However the font on that flag definitely existed by the Han Dynasty. However, the script style on the flag is called Clerical Script, which DID exist during the Han and was in fact the main script style of the period.

Clerical Script certainly existed already, but I am almost certain that Han period Clerical font didn't look like that (the flags reek of computer-generated font).

 

Here's an example of a late Eastern Han clerical script. The character "Han (漢)" can be found at the top right.

mlTUlSe.jpg

 

BTW, I recently found a cute but surprisingly accurate depiction of Han soldiers, courtesy of an artist known as Ginkgo story.

ginkgo-story-hanswarrior-x.jpg?151069918

Edited by wolflance
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, wolflance said:

Clerical Script certainly existed already, but I am almost certain that Han period Clerical font didn't look like that (the flags reek of computer-generated font).

 

Here's an example of a late Eastern Han clerical script. The character "Han (漢)" can be found at the top right.

mlTUlSe.jpg

 

BTW, I recently found a cute but surprisingly accurate depiction of Han soldiers, courtesy of an artist known as Ginkgo story.

ginkgo-story-hanswarrior-x.jpg?151069918

Did they have axemen ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...