01-29-2008, 02:57 PM
Its length was probably the origin of its name, as the word kontos could also mean "oar" or "barge-pole" in Classical Greek (See the Liddell-Scott). For cavalry it had to be wielded with two hands while directing the horse using the knees; this made it a specialist weapon that required a lot of training and good horseman skills to use effectively.
The kontarion was used by the first ranks of each chiliarchy in order to fend off enemy cavalry. In our previous discussions I have mentioned that Anastasiadis says the Praecepta does not specify how the menaulion was used to defeat cataphracts. However he puts this proposition, namely that the kontaria of the hoplitai would bristle 30 spans to the fore of the taxiarchy (dwarfing the length of the menaulion) and would achieve first strike. So the enemy runs onto a thicket of kontaria -which could in most cases be counted on to stop a cataphract charge.
However, if the enemy break through, then the menaulatoi could dispatch their foes by stabbing (according to the Sylloge) the enemy horse, or a dismounted fully armoured cavalryman. The Praecepta also describes the situation where the enemy rush to attack in a linear fashion, the hoplitai pin them down to their front with their long kontaria while the javelineers and menaulatoi group up in phalanxes and rip into the enemy by outflanking them.
The Romans adopted a variation of the kontos called a contus. The Roman contus was also wielded two-handed. The later Byzantine kontarion was used by the Byzantine cataphracts single-handed couched under the armpit, and was probably the origin of the couched lance used by the Normans.
I don't have access to my sources at the moment but from memory and earlier posts I think I have mentioned the most salient sources.
The kontarion was used by the first ranks of each chiliarchy in order to fend off enemy cavalry. In our previous discussions I have mentioned that Anastasiadis says the Praecepta does not specify how the menaulion was used to defeat cataphracts. However he puts this proposition, namely that the kontaria of the hoplitai would bristle 30 spans to the fore of the taxiarchy (dwarfing the length of the menaulion) and would achieve first strike. So the enemy runs onto a thicket of kontaria -which could in most cases be counted on to stop a cataphract charge.
However, if the enemy break through, then the menaulatoi could dispatch their foes by stabbing (according to the Sylloge) the enemy horse, or a dismounted fully armoured cavalryman. The Praecepta also describes the situation where the enemy rush to attack in a linear fashion, the hoplitai pin them down to their front with their long kontaria while the javelineers and menaulatoi group up in phalanxes and rip into the enemy by outflanking them.
The Romans adopted a variation of the kontos called a contus. The Roman contus was also wielded two-handed. The later Byzantine kontarion was used by the Byzantine cataphracts single-handed couched under the armpit, and was probably the origin of the couched lance used by the Normans.
I don't have access to my sources at the moment but from memory and earlier posts I think I have mentioned the most salient sources.
Peter Raftos