Full Version: Byzantine Weapons and Warfare
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
The thing with this is that if you use hanging lamellar (at least per Tim Dawson's reconstruction) there's enough vertical flex in the armour that this gap wouldn't be needed.

I made a klivanion to Tim's design, and it's incredibly flexible. No problem bending at the waist - the layers overlap beautifully. If, on the other hand, the corselet was rigid, I can see a better case for the gap.

Still freaks me out, though. And anyhow, in Western Europe in the age of plate, rigid breastplates covered right down to the waist without hindering the wearer from bending over. So why would the Romans not be able to solve the same problem? Not as if they didn't have time to work out a solution, is it?
Varangian Guard in "summer order"
By my friend Nikos ... t-Iran.JPG The Persian Knight, Sassanid dynasty (226-637).

Their flexible but strong scale armor was made from overlapping plates of bronze or iron sewn onto an undergarment of leather, both on rider and horse. A close-fitting helmet that covered the head and neck was worn, with only narrow slits for the eyes. Procopius writing in the 6th century describes the sight of massed Persian cataphracts: All the companies were clad in iron, and all parts of their bodies were covered with thick plates, so fitted that the stiff-joints conformed to those of their limbs. The forms of human faces were so skillfully fitted to their heads that since their entire body was covered with metal; arrows that fell upon them could lodge only where they could see a little through tiny openings opposite the pupil of the eye, or where through the tip of their nose they were able to get a little breath.

Just thought I'd drop my two cents worth, all the pics of the Cataphracts look good but they don't fit the description of Clibanarii. From what I have heard the Cataphracts were the lighter archery units with the Clibanarii being the heavier shock troops. The problem with the roman descriptions is they considered them all Cataphracts but this just isn't true while collectively they were all Cataphracts, not all Cataphracts where Clibanarii. The Clibanarii would sweep through the enemy in a swift devastating charge contacting and and separating enemy unit cohesion. The Cataphracts following close on the heels of the Clibanarii charge blanket the enemy with a deadly hail of arrows.

like I said just my two cents worth.
In Byzantine service the Clibanioforoi where "super-heavy" cataphracts while the Tagamatic or Thematic Armored cavalry might have ridden less well protected horses.
kind regards
By definition, a klibanophoros is someone who wears a klivanion. A kataphrakt is someone who is "completely armoured".

How these terms were used at the time, and whether they meant different things, or the same thing, or there was an overlap between them, is problematic.

The description by Procopius relates to the 6th century AD. Kataphraktoi fell out of use and were re-established at elast once - there's no reason to assume there was much in common between the kataphraktoi of the 6th century and those of the 10th (for example).

The Eastern Romans made a habit of using old terms to describe new things which were vaguely similar. There's no reason they shouldn't do the same with these terms.
The Clibanioforos are described by Nikiforos II (percepta militaria) as ultra heavy catafracts. Probably the "Tagmata" had heavier protection than thematic troops. But Steve is right to point out that military fashions must have changed.
Kind regards
I need some Arab or Islamic sources for the defeat of the Arab navy outside Constantinople in the 7th century. Thanks in advance
Hello can some body please point me to the historical references of the LATINIKON or LATINIKOI regiment of Knights in Byzantine service?
Kind regards
I don't know of any specific regiment of latin knights, but certainly there are references to various latin (mostly French, Norman or Flemish) cavalry in the service of the Empire as mercenaries.

There's the famous Roussel de Bailleuil who caused so much trouble when he turned his coat and tried to split off a region of Imperial territory to set up his own "independent" principality in the 1070's.

There are references IIRC in Blondel/Benedikz's "Varangians of Byzantium" to Normans in Imperial service - who may or may not have been included among the Varangians.

There's the 500 Fleming knights sent by Count Robert I of Flanders to served the Empire from about 1090 (mentioned in the Alexiad of Anna Komnena).

And finally there was the Catalan Company in the 14th century - who also tried to grab some Imperial territory for themselves and caused more trouble than they were worth.
Thanks Steve.
Kind regards

Byzantine flamethrowers thats kinda sweet for a medieval army if you ask me

check that link out , and btw hi all im new here Big Grin
Interesting, but I'd prefer to see the pyr thalassion projectors that were used on shipboard - big enough to destroy an enemy fleet, made of bronze, with lions' heads at the spout . . .
Can someone post some images of the war flag(s) of the Byzantine Empire.The yellow one with the 2headed eagle is for peace and the red with
the 2headed eagle for war?
Quote:Can someone post some images of the war flag(s) of the Byzantine Empire.The yellow one with the 2headed eagle is for peace and the red with
the 2headed eagle for war?

thats correct atleast i know that the red one is the war flag
I know its the flag the albanians use though they dont admit it , i just want to see the original version
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43