Question About SEA Armor

[Aqtai]

Originally Posted by Mark Bowditch

I put my money mostly on these two, at least as far as continental SEA is concerned. The largest killer in the Burmese campaigns into Thailand (and a large factor for the English during the Anglo-Burmese wars) was heat and disease. Moving long distances in armor just was not healthy. Throw in the rust and rot factor and it might not have been worth the investment. Even the dry season was pretty wet, and not infrequently a siege lasted into the wet season, or a retreat happened during the wet season. With regard to 5), there were two principle tactics in SEA warfare (let me exclude what the Khmer did back in the day, because I don't have info on this): fast strikes, and seiges. Pitched/set battles were avoided, and even when there were such battles, such as attempts to relieve or break a seige, the main tactic was speed and manuverability, not heavy infantry tactics. None of this particularly favors, or requires, much in the way of armor.

Here is another thought. To the extent SEA groups picked up the idea of armor from Europeans, such as the Portuguese and Dutch, this would have been less likely on the continent because contact with Europeans came much later, and was not so much in the nature of conflict as it was in islandic SEA. Prolonged contact wasn't established until the mid to late 17th century, pretty much, and the links were commercial. In the late 17th cen there were a few mix-ups with the Portugese, a couple isolated encounters with the British and French in the 18th, all of which were really naval conflicts that lead to some land action, and of course the Anglo-Burmese wars in the 19th century. By then, armor had fallen out of use in Europe, so what you see is the assimilation of musket and cannon technlogy and tactics.

The mail and plate armour worn in the Philipines would have provided a fair degree of ventilation. It is also quite similar to Indo-Iranian mail and plate armour, I think it is more like they wore this armour as a result of Iranian and Indian influence, NOT European influence.

To answer Kris, as to how easy it was to penetrate, Moro mail is butted not rivetted, it would be a lot easier to penetrate Moro mail than rivetted Indian or Iranian mail.

[Battara]

Aqtai, I also lean in the direction of first influence on Moro armour being from India/Persia. This was an older influence in trade relations. I am of the opinion, however, that this was modified by early Spanish contact. Special note would be of the helmet sometimes worn by Moro datu with the armour that is fashioned aftert the early Spanish morions at the time of contact.

[HangPC2]

Bugis Chain Mail (Baju Zirah @ Berantai Pahlawan Bugis)

Bugis Shield (Perisai Bugis)








Location : Kuala Selangor Historical Museum, Bukit Melawati, Selangor (Malaysia)












Location : National Museum, Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

[HangPC2]

Location : Ngah Ibrahim Fort Museum, Perak (Malaysia)

[HangPC2]

Moro Chain Mail (Baju Zirah @ Berantai Bangsamoro)




[/color]




Malay Brunei Chain Mail (Baju Zirah @ Berantai Melayu Brunei)







Sources : http://www.geoship.jp/BRUNEI/