Byzantine Weapons and Warfare

[Urselius]

"Archaising" artwork is certainly acknowledged as a characteristic of Byzantine art, particularly so as you get closer to the City. However, I think we need to be rather careful ascribing motives to our forebears (well, three of them, anyway ). What you postulate about the mindset behind "archaised" armour may well be true, but there is no way of knowing for sure if it really was the case. And anyway, the motives are unimportant - it's the fact that's important.

Certainly the other points you raised in support of your thesis - the apparent contradiction between on the one hand what is found in contemporary descriptions of Byzantine armour and equipment and in the archaeological record, and on the other hand what is shown in the pictorial sources, has to make us cautious about accepting contemporary illustrations as gospel.

One such I do believe to be pretty close to the truth, even in the matter of helmets, is the Skylitzes Chronicle of Madrid. Some academics claim to be able to see the hands of something like half a dozen different artists in this. To my chagrin, I can see only three styles different enough for me to say - "yes, that's a different bloke".

The one I am fairly willing to trust is the one you refer to above, who did the pics of the guys with the (face-covering?) (mail curtains?). Why? I dunno. Perhaps the level of detail, perhaps the amount of variation between the individual figures in his pictures (for example, he shows at least four different kinds of helmet in a single scene), perhaps he just impresses me as an artist. Not a very rational basis for a decision, I grant you, but there you are.

Unfortunately we have very little to work with, and out theories regarding some of the more esoteric bits of equipment will always remain just that - theories (assuming, of course some archaeologist doesn't stumble tomorrow upon a huge 11th century Byzantine arsenal - sigh).

BTW, one other source I regard as probably being pretty damned close to the truth (because it was well away from the acknowledged archaising influence of Constantinople) is the rock paintings of the Go"reme Valley in Kappadokia. I don't know if you've already seen it, but you might be interested in the frescoes of the so-called "Dovecote" church at Cavus,in.No helmets, though.

I come from a scientific rather than historical background and I suspect that, because of this, I am quite comfortable in proposing theories concerning the behaviour of people in the past which cannot be proven in any concrete manner.

With the various references in literature, and the face masks from the Great Palace, there seems to be no reasonable doubt that the Byzantines did, to an unknowable extent, employ armour that gave protection to the face. I wonder if the lack of pictorial depiction isn't connected with the central position of the ikon in Orthodox devotion. That the artist was so steeped in the ideal of a connection between the viewer and the depicted human figure that covering the face of an image, even a secular one, was just unnatural.

The "Dovecote" church images are very interesting, particularly the use of, probable, hardened leather scale over mail. The oval abdominal feature reminded me of the difference between classical muscle cuirasses made for infantry and cavalry use. The former extended down over the lower abdomen wheras the latter had a squared off lower margin, which would have increased comfort when mounted. I suspect that the extent of 'mix-and-match' in Byzantine armour use was quite extensive, with articles being discarded or added depending on the nature of combat. The oval feature could possibly be a reinforce for the lower abdomen used when fighting on foot.

A couple of images which I've noticed some interesting features include the "Anastasius Triumph" ivory.
see: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image ... _whole.jpg

The soldier carrying the victory on the left appears to have solid shoulder cops on his armour.

In Oman's first volume of his work on Medieval warfare, there are number of illustrations of from a Byzantine work of 1066. One shows a soldier on foot wearing unmistakable mail chausses, though worn with typical Byzantine boots.