Page 64 - CHRISTIE'S Chinese Ceramics & Works of Art 09/14 - 15 / 17

Although the purpose of this uniform was purely ceremonial, its construction is based on armor used for
protection in battle. The legs were covered with aprons for protection, but the seat was left free to allow
the wearer to mount a horse.
The gilt rivets on this armor, known as dingjia (‘armor with nails’), can be traced to military gear found
on the terracotta warriors in the tomb of the Qin Emperor (260-220 BC), although suits of armor during
the Qin dynasty did not incorporate luxury fabrics and were constructed with consideration of their
practical use. In the Sui dynasty (AD 581-619) and Tang dynasty (AD 618-907), more elaborate suits of
armor began to appear. A nearly identical Manchu military oficer’s ceremonial armor, hat, and helmet
are in the collection of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts and are illustrated by R. Jacobsen, Imperial Silks:
Ch’ing Dynasty Textiles in The Minneapolis Institute of Arts, vol. 1, 2000, pp. 346-47, nos. 137 and 138.
In a discussion of the Minneapolis armor, Jacobson suggests that the Y-shaped geometric decoration
(which is the same as the decoration on the present armor) has been used on military uniforms since the
Tang dynasty.
The gold brocade ground on this armor suggests that this uniform would have been made for a member
of the Imperial Guard of the Forbidden City. A man who is thought to be Huang Peisong, an Imperial
guard for the Guangxu emperor and later for Yuan Shikai, has been pictured wearing identical armor.

62