Page 2

皮、铜和铁一起存在

Leather, Bronze, and Iron Overlapped

有些图把铠甲排成升级队伍：先是兽皮，再是青铜，然后铁和钢。真正历史没有这么整齐。

古代有皮甲片、铜甲片和铁甲片。铁甲出现以后，皮革和布也没有马上消失。不同地方、不同士兵和身体不同部位，会选择不同材料。

工匠要考虑重量、活动、天气、制作时间和修理。最新、最硬的材料，不一定适合每一个人。

Some pictures arrange armor like game upgrades: first hide, then bronze, then iron and steel. Real history was not so tidy.

Ancient armor used leather, bronze, and iron plates. Leather and cloth did not disappear when iron appeared. Different places, soldiers, and parts of the body could use different materials.

Armor makers thought about weight, movement, weather, time, and repair. The newest or hardest material was not always right for every job.

Page 3

小片也能保护身体

Small Plates Can Protect a Body

很多中国古代铠甲不是一整块硬壳。工匠在小甲片上打孔，再用绳带把一排排甲片连起来。有些甲片像屋瓦或鱼鳞一样重叠。

小片能在身体弯曲时移动，坏了一部分也可能只换那一块。不过，打孔、涂漆和穿绳都很费时间，绳子还会磨坏。

兵马俑把甲片形状做得很细，却是陶土。它们不能证明所有秦兵都穿同一种材料和样式。

Much ancient Chinese armor was not one hard shell. Makers punched holes in small plates and tied rows together with cords. Some plates overlapped like roof tiles or fish scales.

Small plates could shift when the body bent. A damaged part might be replaced without remaking the whole suit. But punching, painting, and lacing took time, and cords wore out.

The Terracotta Warriors show armor shapes in great detail, but their armor is clay. They cannot prove that every Qin soldier wore the same material or design.

Page 4

从锈块找回铠甲

Finding Armor Inside a Lump of Rust

汉代墓里，一件铁甲已经锈成一团。修复者慢慢整理，发现它由将近三千片铁甲片组成。别的墓还留下上万片残片。

甲片上的孔、形状和绳子痕迹，帮助修复者找出它们怎样连接。不同结构说明，同一时代也没有一套所有人都穿的制服。

现代图里的护面头盔和红缨是设计者加的，不能变成汉代全军的历史事实。

In one Han tomb, an iron suit had rusted into a solid lump. Conservators slowly separated it and found nearly three thousand plates. Another tomb held more than ten thousand armor fragments.

Holes, shapes, and traces of cord helped researchers work out how the pieces joined. Different structures show that one period did not have a single uniform worn by everyone.

The face-covering helmet and red plume in the modern picture are design choices. They cannot become facts about the whole Han army.

Page 2

材料没有排队退出历史

Materials Did Not Leave History in a Line

考古没有支持“兽皮、青铜、铁、钢”整齐升级的时间线。商代有彩绘皮甲片，西周有铜片，春秋战国有涂漆皮甲；铁片出现以后，皮革、织物和金属仍继续并存。

工匠要平衡原料、工时、重量、活动、潮湿和维修。硬皮能做成较轻的甲片；金属耐切割，却需要采矿、冶炼和锻打，也会生锈。十二至十三世纪云南大理国仍有以涂漆硬皮为主、同时使用铜合金和铁的铠甲。

旧材料没有因为新材料出现就自动消失。图片能表现裁切、打孔和连接，完整胸衣、工具与营地却是想象。

Archaeology does not support a neat hide-bronze-iron-steel upgrade line. Painted leather plates appear in Shang contexts, bronze plates in the Western Zhou, and lacquered leather suits in the Eastern Zhou. After iron plates appeared, leather, textiles, and metals continued side by side.

Makers balanced materials, labor, weight, movement, moisture, and repair. Hardened leather could make lighter plates. Metal resisted cutting but required mining, smelting, and forging, and it rusted. A twelfth- or thirteenth-century suit from the Dali Kingdom in Yunnan still combined lacquered hard leather with copper alloy and iron.

An older material did not vanish when a new one arrived. The illustration can show cutting and joining, but its complete vest, tools, and camp are imagined.

Page 4

兵马俑保存外形

The Terracotta Army Preserves Shapes

兵马俑细致表现领口、腰带和甲片排列。步兵、骑兵、军官和无甲人物的覆盖方式不同，这能帮助研究分工和结构，却不能证明所有秦兵装备一样。

陶俑的甲也是陶土。许多研究者根据战国皮甲实物和雕塑表面，把它们解释为涂漆皮甲形象；秦代已有铁器，真实军队可能使用多种材料。

秦陵另一个坑有石灰岩片和铜丝做的铠甲，太重太脆，可能是墓葬礼仪模型。它能说明结构，不表示士兵穿石甲上战场。

The Terracotta Army models collars, belts, and rows of plates in remarkable detail. Infantry, cavalry, officers, and unarmored figures show different coverage. These differences help researchers study military roles and armor structure, but they do not show one uniform for every Qin soldier.

The armor itself is clay. Comparing it with Warring States leather finds leads many researchers to see lacquered leather in the modeled suits. Yet iron already existed, and a real army may have used more than one material.

Another mausoleum pit held armor made from limestone plates and copper wire. Too heavy and fragile for battle, it was probably a funerary model. It reveals construction without showing soldiers fighting in stone.

Page 5

锈块里的三千片

Three Thousand Plates Inside the Rust

汉代铁甲越来越重要，却不表示此前没有铁、以后没有皮。西汉刘胜墓的一团锈铁，整理后发现接近三千片熟铁甲片。徐州另一座王陵的上万片残片，又能复原札甲和不同大小的鳞甲。

同一时期也有多种结构。“铁”和“钢”也不是简单先后两级。秦汉工匠已经使用熟铁、钢和不同铸铁，并把金属片、皮绳、漆和织物组合。

现代图里的整套甲、护面头盔和红缨可以解释编缀，却没有证据证明全军穿同一套。

Iron armor grew more important in the Han, but that does not mean iron had never appeared before or leather vanished later. A rusted mass from Liu Sheng's Western Han tomb became nearly three thousand wrought-iron plates after conservation. More than ten thousand fragments from another royal tomb near Xuzhou revealed lamellar and several scale structures.

One period held many designs. Iron and steel were not two simple steps either. Qin and Han makers already used wrought iron, steel, and forms of cast iron, sometimes combining metal plates, leather cords, lacquer, and cloth.

The complete suit, face-covering helmet, and red plume in the modern image explain lacing. They do not prove a whole army wore the same set.

Page 2

材料不是一级一级换掉的

Materials Did Not Replace One Another in a Neat Order

旧故事常把铠甲排成一列：先有兽皮，再有青铜，接着是铁，最后升级成钢。考古发现并不支持这样整齐的台阶。商代墓葬发现过彩绘皮质甲片，西周有铜甲片，春秋战国又有成套的涂漆皮甲；铁甲片逐渐出现以后，皮革、织物和金属仍会在不同地区、不同部队和不同部位继续使用。

为什么不把所有甲都换成“最新材料”？因为工匠要同时考虑原料、制作时间、重量、活动方式、潮湿和维修。硬皮经过整形和涂漆，可以做成轻便的甲片；金属更耐切割，却要采矿、冶炼和锻打，也可能生锈。十二至十三世纪云南大理国的一件实物铠甲，仍以涂了红黑漆的硬皮板为主体，并同时使用皮绳、铜合金和铁。这件晚期皮甲证明，旧材料不会因为铁器出现就自动退出历史。

第一幅图可以帮助我们看见“裁皮、打孔、连接”的动作，却不是商代工坊的复原图。画中的完整胸衣、缝法、衣服、工具和营地布置都属于现代想象，不能拿来证明商周士兵统一穿这种样式。

An old-fashioned story lines armor up like this: first animal hide, then bronze, then iron, and finally steel. Archaeology does not show such a tidy staircase. Painted leather armor plates have been found in Shang tombs, bronze plates are known from the Western Zhou, and complete suits of lacquered leather armor survive from the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods. After iron plates appeared, leather, textiles, and metals continued to serve different regions, units, and parts of the body.

Why not replace every suit with the “newest” material? Armor makers had to balance raw materials, labor, weight, movement, weather, and repair. Shaped and lacquered hard leather could form relatively light plates. Metal resisted cutting well, but it required mining, smelting, and forging, and it could rust. A surviving suit from the Dali Kingdom in twelfth- or thirteenth-century Yunnan still used rigid leather panels coated with red and black lacquer, together with leather laces, copper alloy, and iron. This late leather armor proves that an older material did not vanish when iron became available.

The first illustration helps us picture the actions of cutting, piercing, and joining leather, but it is not a reconstruction of a Shang workshop. Its complete vest, stitching pattern, clothes, tools, and camp are modern inventions. It cannot prove that Shang or Zhou soldiers wore one standard design like this.

Page 4

兵马俑告诉我们外形，不直接告诉我们材料

The Terracotta Army Shows Shape, Not Material Directly

秦始皇陵的陶俑把三世纪前的衣领、腰带和甲片排列塑得很细。有些步兵俑的躯干和肩膀有甲，有些骑兵俑的防护较短，也有俑没有穿甲；军官形象的装饰和覆盖方式又不同。这些差异让我们研究军队分工和甲衣结构，却不能证明每个真实秦兵都得到同样装备。

陶俑的甲也是陶土塑出来的。根据战国涂漆皮甲实物和陶俑表面的表现，许多研究者把它们理解为涂漆皮甲的形象；但秦代已经有铁器，真实军队也可能使用不止一种材料。说“秦军主力一定都是皮甲”超出了陶俑能证明的范围。

秦始皇陵另一个坑还出土了用石灰岩片和铜丝编成的甲胄。它们制作精细，却太重、太脆，不适合直接上战场，更可能是陵墓中的礼仪模型。第二幅图把现代真人复原放进兵马俑坑，只能作为“根据陶俑想象真实铠甲”的示意，不能当作考古现场。

The Terracotta Army from the First Emperor's mausoleum models collars, belts, and armor patterns from the third century BCE in remarkable detail. Some infantry figures have protection over the torso and shoulders. Some cavalry figures wear shorter armor, other figures have no armor, and officer figures show different coverage and decoration. These differences help researchers study military roles and armor construction. They do not show that every living Qin soldier received the same equipment.

The armor on each figure is clay. Based on surviving lacquered leather armor from the Warring States period and the modeled surfaces, many scholars interpret the figures as representations of lacquered leather armor. Yet iron was already used in Qin times, and a real army could use more than one material. The figures cannot support the blanket claim that the Qin army's “main armor” was certainly leather.

Another pit at the mausoleum contained armor made from limestone plates joined with copper wire. The pieces are finely made but too heavy and fragile for ordinary combat, so they were probably ceremonial models for the tomb. The second illustration places a modern costumed person inside a Terracotta Army excavation. It can only suggest how someone might imagine armor from the figures; it is not an archaeological scene.

Page 5

汉代铁甲：从锈块读回三千片

Han Iron Armor: Reading Three Thousand Plates from a Rusted Lump

铁甲在战国晚期至汉代越来越重要，但“汉代铁甲登场”仍会让人误以为此前没有铁、此后没有皮。西汉中山靖王刘胜墓中，一件锈结成团的铁甲经过整理，发现由将近三千片熟铁甲片连缀而成。徐州狮子山楚王陵则留下上万片铁甲残片，修复者根据孔位和形状，复原出札甲和不同大小的鳞甲。出土物告诉我们的不是一套统一制服，而是同一时期也有多种结构。

古代“铁”和“钢”也不是排在两级台阶上的简单名词。对秦汉铁器的科学分析已经发现熟铁、钢和不同种类的铸铁制品。工匠会通过冶炼、锻打和热处理得到不同性质的材料；一件装备还可能把铁片、皮绳、漆和织物组合在一起。因此，不能把唐宋说成钢甲突然替代铁甲的时刻，更不能说钢只供极少数将军使用而普通人全部停在“铁时代”。

第三幅图里的整套铁札甲、护面头盔和红色盔缨，是现代设计者组合出的汉军形象。它可以解释铁片编缀的概念，却没有证据说明汉军都穿这一套，也没有证据说明红缨是全军统一识别标志。

Iron armor became increasingly important from the late Warring States through the Han, but saying “iron armor arrived in the Han” makes it sound as if iron had never appeared before and leather vanished afterward. In the Western Han tomb of Liu Sheng, Prince Jing of Zhongshan, conservators separated a corroded mass into a suit made from nearly three thousand wrought-iron plates. At the tomb of a King of Chu near Xuzhou, more than ten thousand iron fragments allowed researchers to reconstruct lamellar armor and several types of larger and smaller scale armor. The finds reveal variety within one period, not a single uniform.

“Iron” and “steel” are also not two simple levels on a timeline. Scientific studies of Qin and Han iron objects have identified wrought iron, steel, and several kinds of cast iron. Craftspeople changed a material's properties through smelting, forging, and heat treatment, while one piece of equipment could combine iron plates, leather cords, lacquer, and cloth. We cannot describe the Tang or Song as the moment when steel armor suddenly replaced iron, or claim that steel belonged only to a tiny group of generals while everyone else remained in an “iron age.”

The complete lamellar suit, face-covering helmet, and red plume in the third illustration are a modern designer's composite image of a Han soldier. It can demonstrate the idea of laced iron plates. It cannot show that Han troops all wore this set, and there is no evidence here for a standard red plume used to identify every formation.

Page 6

找出“材料进化图”里的陷阱

Spot the Trap in the “Evolution” Picture

再看第四幅图：四件胸甲从毛边皮衣排到光亮钢壳，很像电子游戏里的装备升级。可是它们的轮廓更接近现代人对欧洲整块胸甲的想象，并不能代表中国历代铠甲。真正的变化往往发生在甲片大小、开孔方式、重叠方向、覆盖部位和编缀材料上，未必一眼就能排成“越来越亮、越来越硬”的队伍。

朝代名称也不能替代地点、兵种和用途。骑马的人需要肩臂活动，步兵可能更在意躯干和腿部覆盖，仪仗甲又可能重视颜色与装饰；边地和中原得到的原料与技术也不同。同一时代并存的差异，有时比两个朝代之间的差异还大。

Now look at the fourth illustration. Four breastplates march from a fur-edged hide vest to a shining steel shell, like equipment upgrades in a video game. Their shapes are closer to modern ideas about European solid breastplates than to a reliable survey of Chinese armor through the dynasties. Many important changes in Chinese armor involved plate size, hole patterns, overlap direction, protected areas, and lacing materials. They cannot always be arranged visually from “duller and softer” to “shinier and harder.”

A dynasty name cannot replace information about place, military role, and purpose. A rider needed free movement at the shoulders and arms. An infantry soldier might value more coverage over the torso or legs, while parade armor might emphasize color and decoration. Border regions and the central plains also had access to different materials and technical traditions. Differences within one time period could be greater than differences between two dynasties.