Roman Leather Lamellae Scales from Karanis, Egypt

[Nathan Ross]

are we thinking of the same papyrus?

It seems so! I took my information from Karl Strobel's essay in Erdkamp's Companion to the Roman Army.

I assume Strobel reckoned that numerus cataphractorum and numerus Salaratorum Peregrinorum referred to the same military unit. Is this not possible, do you think?

[Renatus]

I assume Strobel reckoned that numerus cataphractorum and numerus Salaratorum Peregrinorum referred to the same military unit. Is this not possible, do you think?

Anything is possible but I certainly would not be as dogmatic about it as Strobel seems to be. I see no reason, in a legal document in which some element of precision is required, for a unit to be referred to in two different ways. If the correct name of the unit were numerus Salaratorum Peregrinorum, I would expect it either to be named in full wherever it is mentioned or for it to be given its full name where it is first mentioned and thereafter referred to as "the above-mentioned unit" or "the same squadron", both of which occur in relation to Barsimes' unit. Numerus Salaratorum Peregrinorum only appears towards the end of the document in identifying Rufus Abedsai. I see no problem in Barsimes' unit being referred to simply as numerus cataphractorum. Cataphractorum is unusual but numeri catafractariorum are attested epigraphically.

[ValentinianVictrix]

I stand corrected, there is no evidence of them being Sarmatian:

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/17-roman-mi...=15#346975

However, I would imagine the practice was adopted from the Sarmatians and Parthians.

I have a suspicion that the claims of cataphract introduction into Roman service via Parthians stems from the pen of Phil Barker of Wargames Research Group fame. I believe he made this claim in his book Armies and Enemies of Ancient Rome and also in some of his Ancient Wargames Rules army lists that deal with the Middle Imperial and Late Imperial Roman armies. He states that Parthian nobles, fleeing from Persia when the Sasanids ousted the Parthian rulers, were responsible for at least the initial creation of the Cataphract corps in Roman service. I have asked Phil a number of times where he obtained the references for this without much success. I believe its possibly due to some rather vague references to Parthians coming over to the Romans within both the Scriptores Historiae Augustae and Zosimus.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Both of which are incredibly unreliable for this time, if I recall correctly. Thanks VV.

I heard about your book from Pavel by the way, congrats on your newest work!

[daryush]

He states that Parthian nobles, fleeing from Persia when the Sasanids ousted the Parthian rulers, were responsible for at least the initial creation of the Cataphract corps in Roman service. I have asked Phil a number of times where he obtained the references for this without much success. I believe its possibly due to some rather vague references to Parthians coming over to the Romans within both the Scriptores Historiae Augustae and Zosimus.

There is no evidence of this in either the Iranian or Armenian traditions as far as I'm aware - the Arsacids (NOT the Parthians, who are a group of different noble Houses, which included but was not limited to the Arsacids, some of which allied with the Sasanians) were destroyed in Iran but remained in Armenia until much later. It is probable that the House of Mihran may have been a direct offshoot from the House or Arshak (aka the Arsacids) as acknowledged by Hormoz IV to Warahran Chobin, but may already appear as an independent house in the 3rd Century in the Shapur Ka'be-ye-Zartosht (AFAIK)

I may have missed something though.

[Michael Kerr]

John W. Eadie in his paper "The Development of Roman Mailed Cavalry" mentions the ala nova firma miliaria catafractaria Philippiana, which was recruited in the eastern provinces in A.D. 234, was transferred to the west under Maximinus and participated in campaigns against the Alamanni and Germans (235-6), and remained in service during the reign of Philip the Arab,it was raised in the east probably Syria or Mesopotamia. Maybe it contained some Parthian/Arsacid exiles or dissidents.

Regards
Michael Kerr

[Renatus]

John W. Eadie in his paper "The Development of Roman Mailed Cavalry" mentions the ala nova firma miliaria catafractaria Philippiana, which was recruited in the eastern provinces in A.D. 234, was transferred to the west under Maximinus and participated in campaigns against the Alamanni and Germans (235-6), and remained in service during the reign of Philip the Arab,it was raised in the east probably Syria or Mesopotamia. Maybe it contained some Parthian/Arsacid exiles or dissidents.

To my mind, this is altogether too specific, although it is reasonable to argue that this unit was raised by Severus Alexander during or after his Persian campaign and was brought to the West by him as part of the army gathered for his expedition against the invading Germans in 234. It may perhaps be associated with the claim attributed to him of having armed his men with captured Persian equipment (SHA, Severus Alexander, 56. 5). I am not aware of any specific evidence for Parthian nobles having fled to the Roman empire after the rise of the Sasanids, although Dio 80. 3. 2 indicates that at least some took refuge in Armenia.

[Nathan Ross]

It may perhaps be associated with the claim attributed to him of having armed his men with captured Persian equipment (SHA, Severus Alexander, 56. 5). I am not aware of any specific evidence for Parthian nobles having fled to the Roman empire.

I think Eadie suggests that this remark in the Hist. Aug. may be an anachronism. Alexander is made to say that he armed his men using the equipment of the type of cataphract the Parthians called clibanarii: cataphractarios, quos illi clibanarios vocant (Alex Sev 56.5). This is clearly different to other sorts of cataphracti, which had existed in the Roman army since Hadrian's day. Clibanarii, on the other hand, don't seem to appear until the 4th century. Many of these units mentioned in the ND have an eastern association - clibanarii Parthi, or Persae, or Palmirenorum. Clearly the Romans believed that clibanarii were 'eastern' cavalry. Cataphract, however, apparently had no such suggested origin.

There is a note in Herodian (7.2) that Alexander Severus' army in Germania included many Moorish javelin men and Osrhoenian and Armenian archers... included, too, were a number of Parthian mercenaries. These all seem to be light cavalry, unless the 'mercenaries' were equipped differently.

(But we're getting a bit off topic here, as always seems to happen in these cases... )

[daryush]

I have no idea what the standard equipment for a Roman cataphract would be but my understanding is that they wore maille OR cuirasses but not both. The "clibinarii" is perhaps a direct Latin translation of "tanurig," which means oven-men, and likely refers to the (fairly recent, in the 3rd or 4th Century) practice of wearing a cuirass over maille.

[Renatus]

I think Eadie suggests that this remark in the Hist. Aug. may be an anachronism. Alexander is made to say that he armed his men using the equipment of the type of cataphract the Parthians called clibanarii: cataphractarios, quos illi clibanarios vocant (Alex Sev 56.5).

I am quite sure that the use of the word clibanarios in the Historia Augusta is anachronistic. The earliest dateable reference to clibanarii is in Lactantius, relating to an incident during the reign of Maximin Daia. However, I have argued elsewhere that another expression for this type of cavalry is cataphracti equites (as appears in Ammianus) and that is the term used by Herodian in relation to Maximinus Thrax's march into Italy. This helps persuade me that the claim that Severus Alexander kitted out his men in this fashion is not pure fiction. His speech to the Senate is probably a forgery but I think that it contains a kernel of truth.

[TDawson]

The Karanis armour is very much like what I characterise as the "Assyrian-Etruscan group", albeit simplified to exploit the less demanding qualities of leather relative to metal. It could just as easily be for man or horse. Without detailed excavation notes, no strong guess can be made from the fragments.

[Renatus]

I have no idea what the standard equipment for a Roman cataphract would be but my understanding is that they wore maille OR cuirasses but not both. The "clibinarii" is perhaps a direct Latin translation of "tanurig," which means oven-men, and likely refers to the (fairly recent, in the 3rd or 4th Century) practice of wearing a cuirass over maille.

My study of Roman cataphracts leads me to conclude that they fall into two categories, catafractarii who probably wore mail or scale hauberks and clibanarii who probably wore cuirasses. I do not favour the 'oven-men' theory, which seems to me to be a modern idea, but rather believe that clibanarius derives from clibanus or clivanus, meaning 'cuirass'.

[Urselius]

There is also the question of usage. The Greeks used the word kataphraktos to denote anything notable for being "covered over", including types of ship. Therefore, Greco-Roman usage in a military context may not have been particularly precise. Like the use of the English word 'harness' which could denote armour, but also anything notable for the use of strapping.

Julian in an oration to Constantius II:

"...a cuirass made of small pieces protects the shoulders, back and breast. The head and face are covered by a metal mask which makes its wearer look like a glittering statue, for not even the thighs and legs and the very ends of the feet lack this armour. It is attached to the cuirass by fine chain-armour like a web, so that no part of the body is visible and uncovered,"

This sounds like the cuirass is not mail, but it is made of ''small pieces'' - scale or locked scale? My vote would be for locked scale or something else with a certain amount of rigidity, otherwise why would opponents of cataphracts be specially equipped with blunt trauma weapons?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I think someone suggested Ammianus' usage of Catafractarii may have also referred to infantry as well as cavalry.

[Dan Howard]

otherwise why would opponents of cataphracts be specially equipped with blunt trauma weapons?

Because blunt trauma weapons are especially effective against flexible armour. Sword cuts are useless against any kind of armour so if you were facing armoured opponents a mace would be a better backup weapon for your spear.

Like the use of the English word 'harness' which could denote armour, but also anything notable for the use of strapping.

The words come from different time periods. Harness originally meant "gear" or "equipment" and was frequently associated with the "gear of war". The Greeks used hoplon the same way. Today "harness" is associated with strapping - it wasn't at the time.

Agreed that Julian is more likely describing scale, not mail.