laitimes

In ancient times, the government forbade the private possession of equipment, so why is the crime of hiding armor more than hiding knives?

According to my understanding, the biggest knife control in ancient China was during the Qin Dynasty, it is said that after Qin Shi Huang unified the Six Kingdoms, he collected all the weapons in the world and created twelve copper people, and even the raw materials for weapons were not allowed to circulate, what weapons did you build.

In ancient times, the government forbade the private possession of equipment, so why is the crime of hiding armor more than hiding knives?

After the end of ancient wars, it was generally "swords and guns into storage, horses put into the South Mountain", weapons were prohibited from circulation, and successive dynasties had strict control over weapons and armor.

Among them, the two most strictly controlled equipment, one is a bow and crossbow, the other is the armor, it is understandable to prohibit the secret possession of bows and crossbows, after all, this thing is lethal, it is an important output weapon in ancient times, what is the matter with the armor, the armor can not be used to kill.

However, what everyone may not imagine is that in ancient times, the private storage of armor was more serious than the private collection of bows and crossbows, and the laws from the Song Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty adhered to the principle of "one armor top three crossbows, three armor into the prefectural government", that is, three pairs of armor were enough to sentence to death.

Zhou Yafu, a han dynasty general who quelled the rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms, was praised for his strict military management, and his military achievements were outstanding, and he was a general who made great contributions to the Han Dynasty, but Zhou Yafu was very miserable in his later years, and when Zhou Yafu was about to die, his son thought that his father was a great general before his death, and in order to show filial piety, he wanted to build a five-hundred-armor shield as a funeral for Zhou Yafu.

In ancient times, the government forbade the private possession of equipment, so why is the crime of hiding armor more than hiding knives?

Later, this matter was reported, and Emperor Jing sent Ting Wei to interrogate Zhou Yafu whether he wanted to rebel, and Zhou Yafu argued that these were all funeral goods, not rebellion, and as a result, the trial given by Ting Wei was that Zhou Yafu wanted to go to the underworld to rebel. Under such insults, Zhou Yafu was so angry that he went on hunger strike for five days and vomited blood and died.

In fact, in ancient China, there were clear regulations: ordinary people are not allowed to place armor in their homes, and if they hide armor in private, they may be imprisoned, and if they are more serious, they may be sentenced to death. It can be seen that in ancient times, the armor was a prohibited item that was more sensitive than weapons.

The reason for this situation is mainly that the ancient battlefield is very dangerous, and the mortality rate of soldiers on the battlefield is very high, so for their own safety, they must wear solid armor to defend the enemy, but the ancient armor is more expensive than the weapon, so only a small number of elites can wear armor and stand in the front row to fight.

Although you can attack enemies with swords, without armor, it is easy to be stabbed by enemy troops, so armor is far more useful than swords. These heavy infantry, in fact, are equivalent to tanks in today's war, and they are lethal weapons on the battlefield.

In ancient times, the government forbade the private possession of equipment, so why is the crime of hiding armor more than hiding knives?

The TV series we see have staged a lot of war scenes, and the heroes in the TV series are invincible and invincible just by relying on the saber on their bodies, which is actually unscientific. In real battlefields, commanders and generals are required to wear thick armor and their heads are tightly covered.

It would have been difficult to kill a man wearing armor in ancient times, after all, the armor would have been very hard to protect the personal safety of the soldiers in order to go to the battlefield. Although the swords and guns of the soldiers are very sharp, ordinary swords will have a hard time piercing the armor.

The rebellious masses that seemed to be massive in ancient China were often subdued by officers and soldiers who were small in number but superior in number, and one of the most crucial factors was that these rebels did not have high-quality armor.

The officers and soldiers had both weapons issued by the imperial court and very hard armor, so ordinary people often could not beat the officers and soldiers and were suppressed.

In ancient times, if there was a rebellion, the officers and soldiers who were first responsible for suppressing the rebellion would first confiscate their equipment and then imprison them.

In ancient times, the government forbade the private possession of equipment, so why is the crime of hiding armor more than hiding knives?

Armor played a great role in ancient times, and rulers strictly monitored whether people were secretly hiding armor. Moreover, ordinary people will have daily necessities such as kitchen knives at home, as well as sharp hoes and shovels for cultivating land, etc. If these daily necessities are confiscated, the people will not be able to live normally, which is too much for the people.

In ancient times, people who made a living by striking iron were registered for management, and once a war was fought, these people, as special personnel, would be the first to be requisitioned.

However, in peacetime, the imperial court could not completely prohibit the smelting of iron, which was tantamount to hindering the progress of the social productive forces, and if the common people could not cultivate iron agricultural tools, they would inevitably rebel when they were hungry to a certain extent.

Because of this, the rulers of the time did not forbid the use of weapons by the people.

Therefore, if people have knives and guns at home, it can be interpreted as practicing kung fu to strengthen their bodies or protect themselves, but if ordinary people have a set of armor at home, it is difficult to have a normal explanation. So at this time, the rulers will think that they want to rebel, otherwise why would there be such a thing as armor in the family.

Read on