laitimes

Armor is obviously not a lethal weapon, why was it allowed to hide swords in ancient times but absolutely could not hide armor?

Armor is armor, armor is to protect the armor of the soldier's body, armor is the helmet, armor appeared earlier in Chinese history, the Spring and Autumn period has already had armor, the texture of the armor is also with the development of the times the level of productivity and constantly updated, from the early leather armor, to the later metal armor, the Han Dynasty appeared iron armor, similar to turtle shell, the name Xuanjia is probably the abbreviation of Xuanwu armor.

Armor is obviously not a lethal weapon, why was it allowed to hide swords in ancient times but absolutely could not hide armor?

During the Wei and Jin Dynasties, ethnic integration was strengthened, and the armor production process in the Central Plains also absorbed the characteristics of foreign cultures, resulting in Mingguang armor, which basically inherited the shape of this type of armor in later generations. There is also a kind of lock armor, in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Liu Bei gave Huang Zhong a pair of golden lock armor.

In fact, from the time of the Qin State Shang Martingale Transformation Law, a clear stipulation was made that armor could only be made by the state, and private individuals could not make it. No matter how the armor developed and progressed, this provision was always inherited by various dynasties, so the manufacture of the armor was monopolized by the state, and any private manufacture and possession of the armor was a crime, punishable by heavy punishment - exile or beheading. Why?

Nurhaci, the founder of the Qing Dynasty, once relied on the ancestral thirteen pairs of armor to raise troops, unify the Jurchens of Jianzhou, and finally enter the pass, conquer the Central Plains, and establish the Qing Dynasty with a history of nearly three hundred years. It can be seen how powerful the armor was in ancient times! It also shows how harmful the armor is to the ruling class!

The production of armor is difficult, it takes a lot of manpower, material resources, and financial resources, which is impossible and impossible for ordinary people to complete, and the technology and technology required to make a pair of armor are not mastered by ordinary people, so it is very easy to prevent ordinary people from making armor.

Armor is obviously not a lethal weapon, why was it allowed to hide swords in ancient times but absolutely could not hide armor?

But this is not the case for those who hold great power, who are noble, have a large number of natural and social resources, and can make armor privately. In history, there have been many rebellions by princes, these people have a limited number of armies, but there are many troops that can be mobilized during the rebellion, most of these armies are not the army of the state, and a considerable part of them are armed through privately made armor and weapons, so these people have become the focus of the emperor's defense, and it is not allowed to hide armor privately, let alone make it privately.

In ancient times, swords were also strictly forbidden for ordinary people to hold casually, and even if the common people held swords and swords, they were all weapons, but they were far less lethal than the spears, mallets, halberds and crossbows commonly equipped by the army. Moreover, the country's army has armor protection, and the damage caused by the sword to them is already very small, so the imperial court does not care much about the civilian sword, but attaches great importance to the civilian armor.

If the civilian possession of armor is not prohibited, then the strength of the people can compete with the country's army, because the armor can effectively reduce the lethality of the weapons of the imperial army, which is not conducive to the army's suppression of various rebel forces, which is equivalent to changing the balance of forces between the strong and the weak of the country and the weak, threatening the rule of the ruling class.

After the end of the war, successive dynasties would collect weapons and equipment scattered among the people to avoid these weapons and equipment falling into the hands of potential enemies and causing new disputes. In order to ensure the complete collection of weapons and equipment, there are generally severe punishments against those who secretly store weapons and equipment.

Therefore, after repeated confiscation, there are very few weapons and equipment scattered among the people, and those who dare to risk being exiled or even beheaded to secretly hide weapons and equipment, especially armor, must be people with ill intentions, so it is very necessary to crack down on these people.

Armor is obviously not a lethal weapon, why was it allowed to hide swords in ancient times but absolutely could not hide armor?

Ancient people are relatively ignorant, the imperial court's disaster relief ability is poor, once there is a natural disaster and man-made disaster, there will be people to take advantage of the opportunity to rebel, if the people scattered a large number of armor, it is equivalent to the enemy, for the ruling class is very unfavorable, so the dynasties and dynasties have strictly controlled the armor, in order to prevent the occurrence of civil unrest is difficult to deal with.

Read on