Goth armour

[etruschi]

Find the torso armor which the Goth cavalryman's wearing a little confusing. How would the artist have seen the construction and wearing of the armor? Has someone suggestions?
It seems a rein is fastened to the rider's left leg. Is there evidence for such a practise?
Thanks

Etruschi

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I'm not sure what is being represented here - it looks like an Alan or Sarmatian cataphract fighting a Hunnic soldier.

This piece has several things wrong with it: first, as you already pointed out, is the construction of the armor. The leather edging that would have been on the sleeves and torso of a scale cuirass seems to be highly exaggerated.

The second is the Hun's lamellar, which should have metal shoulder armor (like a doubler, but not actually doubled.

Third is the shield of the Hun, which is being held in the wrong fashion for an infantryman. He should be holding it with a handle underneath the boss, rather than it being strapped to his forearm.

If the horse behind him was his, than the method of having the shield strapped to his arm is more acceptable, but the size then becomes a problem as the Huns were horse archers, and primarily not lancers.

I also have no clue where he got the axe - probably that "Hunnic Axe" bullcrap from "deadliest warrior." the Huns used Sassanid-style swords.

There's more but I can't pick it out off the top of my head.

[john m roberts]

Goth armor should be black. And they should wear lots of eyeliner.

[daryush]

The second is the Hun's lamellar, which should have metal shoulder armor (like a doubler, but not actually doubled..

What's your source for this? Central Asian and Chinese / Turkic armours usually just have leather straps over the shoulders, not metal lamellae

[Dan Howard]

The horse is way too big too

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Well, first of all D-shaped lamellar doesn't appear in (Well, Western) Europe until the 6th century with the Avars and Lombards.

Second of All I have never seen depictions of lamellar in Europe without shoulders (granted most of them are Byzantine).

[Michael Kerr]

I don't know too much about armour but rider with contus looks like an Alan noble about to finish off a dismounted Hun. Having to hold the contus with both hands while stabbing at your enemy, attaching reins to your torso or leg makes sense as you still have to maneouvre your horse by slightly turning horse's head to indicate direction you want it to go. Alans were renowned horse breeders & bred bigger horses than your average horse archer steppe ponies to carry the extra weight of armour & weaponry for both rider & horse so horse is probably not too big. But artist probably used his disgression when painting this so as pointed out, there are probably a few errors. But I don't think it is a Goth rider as this rider has a bow as one of his secondary weapons.
Regards
Michael Kerr

[Dan Howard]

Looking at the scale of the rest of the illustration, the horse is at least 16 hands.

[Vindex]

Notwithstanding the artistic quality of the picture, unless there is any other firm evidence, attaching reins to the knees is very limiting in directional instruction to the horse and certainly for controlling speed (I'd like to know the provenance of the horse's bit aswell). Although the bit is severe, the rider is going to have to seriously disturb his position in the saddle (made more rigid by the high pommel) to convey his wishes to the horse.

The reins tied lower down the leg gives far more flexibility for control. The rider can move his lower leg below the knee with more freedom and prevent unseating himself. Modern comparisons indicate the reins attached to the feet (tends to be mounted bandsmen who need both hands to play a musical instrument but the provenance is established). The down side of this, however, is that the reins would fall a lot lower down and could be easily tangled in a battle, and easily cut as well. (The bit is going to get caught up too and that really will cause a problem to the rider).

As for the size of horse, I think the artist may have used an Andalusian type for his model. That may account for the height and the crest on the horse (possibly a stallion) and the shape of its face, but the legs are very fine and horse-like as opposed to pony like.

I also think the horse should have a chamfron if its chest is being protected, but it is all part of the fun of conjecture.

Apart from all that, it is a very well executed, atmospheric picture.

[Vindex]

Notwithstanding the artistic quality of the picture, unless there is any other firm evidence, attaching reins to the knees is very limiting in directional instruction to the horse and certainly for controlling speed (I'd like to know the provenance of the horse's bit aswell). Although the bit is severe, the rider is going to have to seriously disturb his position in the saddle (made more rigid by the high pommel) to convey his wishes to the horse.

The reins tied lower down the leg gives far more flexibility for control. The rider can move his lower leg below the knee with more freedom and prevent unseating himself. Modern comparisons indicate the reins attached to the feet (tends to be mounted bandsmen who need both hands to play a musical instrument but the provenance is established). The down side of this, however, is that the reins would fall a lot lower down and could be easily tangled in a battle, and easily cut as well. (The bit is going to get caught up too and that really will cause a problem to the rider).

As for the size of horse, I think the artist may have used an Andalusian type for his model. That may account for the height and the crest on the horse (possibly a stallion) and the shape of its face, but the legs are very fine and horse-like as opposed to pony like.

I also think the horse should have a chamfron if its chest is being protected, but it is all part of the fun of conjecture.

Apart from all that, it is a very well executed, atmospheric picture.

[Michael Kerr]

Hi Moi, as a horse person and while on reins attached to the feet of rider maybe you can explain what Deb Bennett describes in her book on ancient horsemanship as the use by Persian & Steppe riders of a third rein not attached to the bit but to the noseband by a loop or button to apply slight pressure to the horse's head to enable turns called the Hakma but working the same way as a modern hackamore & whether such a rein would be attached to the feet of the rider. She calls it "riding in collection" to utilize the elastic coiling mechanism built into the horse's back and hind limbs & creates better balance to stop hard, spin tightly and accelerate suddenly.
Regards
Michael Kerr

[Vindex]

Hi Michael

I'll answer in a PM so as not to distract from the topic (sadly later as at work and no access to my reference stuff)...although the horse seems to have distracted enough people already.

In the mean time, look up the bosal bridle on google...

[daryush]

Well, first of all D-shaped lamellar doesn't appear in (Well, Western) Europe until the 6th century with the Avars and Lombards.

Second of All I have never seen depictions of lamellar in Europe without shoulders (granted most of them are Byzantine).

Which finds and depictions in particular are you referring to? Do you have any images?

Thanks.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Not on me right now, I'm at school. My home computer has all my images.

[Vindex]

I'll answer in a PM so as not to distract from the topic

PM sent