Justinian Roman helmet / long mail hauberk

[Caius Artorius Castus]

Dan,

That was actually a real question as I am not familiar with the term itself but from my background in translating other languages to English always look at things like that.

CAC/RPM

[Urselius]

I seem to remember that Hadrada's armour was Byzantine - he certainly served in the Byzantine army early in his career.

There is nothing to suggest that the Varangian guard ever wore byzantine lamellar. They were paid plenty enough to be able to afford mail, which is what was preferred by Byzantine officers. Their lamellar was munitions armour that was worn mainly by the lower ranks.

Regarding Harold, the relevant passage comes from the Ljósvetninga Saga:

Konungur sjálfur átti brynju þá er Emma hét og tók hún á mitt bein og var svo sterk að aldrei festi vopn á. Ch. 31. King [Harald] himself had a coat of mail ([i]brynju) called "Emma" that reached to the knees and was so strong that no weapon could bite into it.[/i]

It may have been a conjecture that Emma was of Byzantine manufacture that I remembered.

I wasn't suggesting that Emma was a lamellar armour, but there is no reason I can think of as to why Varangians would not use whatever equipment was available. The richest Byzantine soldiers, officers included, would have worn a lamellar klivanion over a mailshirt. Andronikos Kontostephanos the megas doux, is recorded as donning his mailshirt and then the rest of his armour before a battle in 1157. The combination of klivanion over mail is also illustrated in contemporary depictions of military saints.

The Norse seem to have shown no chauvanism as regards adopting Byzantine clothing and equipment - quite the opposite, they swanked around in their Byzantine gear when they went home, and apparently impressed the ladies no end.

"Bolli brought with him a great deal of money and many treasures that princes and men of rank had given him. Bolli had such a taste for the ornate when he returned from his travels that he would not wear any clothes that were not made of scarlet cloth or gold-embroidered silk, and all his weapons were inlaid with gold... Bolli rode from the ship with eleven companions. His companions were all wearing scarlet and rode in gilded saddles; they were all fine-looking men, but Bolli surpassed them all. He was wearing clothes of gold-embroidered silk which the Byzantine Emperor had given him, and over them a scarlet cloak. He was girt with the sword 'Leg-Biter', its pommel now gold-embossed and the hilt bound with gold. He had a gilded helmet on his head and a red shield at his side on which a knight was traced in gold. He carried a lance in his hand, as is the custom in foreign lands. Whenever they took lodgings for the night, the womenfolk paid no heed to anything but to gaze at Bolli and his companions and all their finery." (Laxdaela saga, ch. 77)

[Dan Howard]

The richest Byzantine soldiers, officers included, would have worn a lamellar klivanion over a mailshirt.

This is baseless speculation. Nothing to support it. Byzantine officers seem to have preferred mail - worn by itself.

Andronikos Kontostephanos the megas doux, is recorded as donning his mailshirt and then the rest of his armour before a battle in 1157

"Rest of his armour" is more likely to mean items like epilorikon, greaves, helmet, etc. We've already shown that English translations are useless. Need original language.

The combination of klivanion over mail is also illustrated in contemporary depictions of military saints.

Out of hundreds of these illustrations over a period of almost a thousand years I've seen one single example showing a possible depiction of a saint wearing lamellar over mail, but it could be a few other things too, and it is dated too late to be relevant here (Kastoria 13th-14th C). There isn't a single illustration of a Byzantine officer wearing lamellar over mail. Not a single mention in any Byzantine text of lamellar being worn over mail. If you think this combination was worn in this region then produce some examples.

The Norse seem to have shown no chauvanism as regards adopting Byzantine clothing and equipment - quite the opposite, they swanked around in their Byzantine gear when they went home, and apparently impressed the ladies no end.

There is nothing anywhere to suggest that Scandinavians wore anything other than mail during that time period. There has only been a single lamellar find in all of Scandinavia and that was the Khazar armour at the Birka garrison where plenty of foreigners were stationed.

"Bolli brought with him a great deal of money and many treasures that princes and men of rank had given him. Bolli had such a taste for the ornate when he returned from his travels that he would not wear any clothes that were not made of scarlet cloth or gold-embroidered silk, and all his weapons were inlaid with gold... Bolli rode from the ship with eleven companions. His companions were all wearing scarlet and rode in gilded saddles; they were all fine-looking men, but Bolli surpassed them all. He was wearing clothes of gold-embroidered silk which the Byzantine Emperor had given him, and over them a scarlet cloak. He was girt with the sword 'Leg-Biter', its pommel now gold-embossed and the hilt bound with gold. He had a gilded helmet on his head and a red shield at his side on which a knight was traced in gold. He carried a lance in his hand, as is the custom in foreign lands. Whenever they took lodgings for the night, the womenfolk paid no heed to anything but to gaze at Bolli and his companions and all their finery." (Laxdaela saga, ch. 77)

So where does this mention armour? Mail was THE most desired armour by virtually every metal using culture in the world for almost two thousand years. The level of protection it provided is at least as good as lamellar. Comnena said that European mail was superior to Byzantine armour and that it rendered the wearer invulnerable to Byzantine arrows. Harald's mail was said to be invulnerable to all weapons. Why would these guys bother with inferior Byzantine armour when they can get good quality mail?

[Urselius]

“The richest Byzantine soldiers, officers included, would have worn a lamellar klivanion over a mailshirt.”
“This is baseless speculation. Nothing to support it”. - Dan

About the same level of speculation as your assertion that Byzantine officers would have worn mail in preference to other armour.

“Andronikos Kontostephanos the megas doux, is recorded as donning his mailshirt and then the rest of his armour before a battle in 1157”
“"Rest of his armour" is more likely to mean epilorikon, greaves, helmet, etc. We've already shown that English translations are useless. Need original language.” - Dan

Possibly, but not “more likely”, a helmet is a helmet and greaves are not really major elements of armour.

“The combination of klivanion over mail is also illustrated in contemporary depictions of military saints.”
“Out of hundreds of these illustrations over a period of almost a thousand years I've seen one single example showing a possible depiction of a saint wearing scale/lamellar over mail, but it could be a few other things too. There isn't a single illustration of a Byzantine officer wearing lamellar over mail. Not a single mention in any Byzantine text of lamellar being worn over mail. If you think this combination was worn in this region then produce some examples”. – Dan

It is called extrapolation Dan, a scientifically valid procedure. There are hundreds of images of Byzantine soldiers wearing lamellar armour. There is only one before c. 1250, that I know of, showing them wearing unequivocal depictions of ring mail. However, there are a reasonable number of written mentions of mail being worn. Most images interpreted as showing mail actually depict very fine scales, but as they are also shown as making up aventails they are usually interpreted as being ring-mail. Byzantines used donkeys – plenty of evidence for this - they also, some of them, wore hair-shirts (even emperors) there is also written evidence of this. Therefore Byzantine officers could have gone into battle mounted on donkeys and wearing hair shirts. However, common sense would suggest that they would wear the best protection available. We know that lamellar klivania and mail shirts were available, a combination of both – klivanion for the force absorbing properties of lamellar for the torso, supplemented by mail for its flexibility on the limbs, and as a supplementary protection under the klivanion – the best available protection.

“The Norse seem to have shown no chauvinism as regards adopting Byzantine clothing and equipment - quite the opposite, they swanked around in their Byzantine gear when they went home, and apparently impressed the ladies no end.”
“There is nothing anywhere to suggest that Scandinavians wore anything other than mail. There has only been a single lamellar find in all of Scandinavia and that has been shown to have been Khazar armour at the Birka garrison where plenty of foreigners were stationed.” –Dan

Well, there is virtually no archaeological evidence for Byzantine lamellar. Once again we are thrown on to the use of common sense – why would a Varangian have declined to use a lamellar armour if it was offered to him? See below.

"Bolli brought with him a great deal of money and many treasures that princes and men of rank had given him. Bolli had such a taste for the ornate when he returned from his travels that he would not wear any clothes that were not made of scarlet cloth or gold-embroidered silk, and all his weapons were inlaid with gold... Bolli rode from the ship with eleven companions. His companions were all wearing scarlet and rode in gilded saddles; they were all fine-looking men, but Bolli surpassed them all. He was wearing clothes of gold-embroidered silk which the Byzantine Emperor had given him, and over them a scarlet cloak. He was girt with the sword 'Leg-Biter', its pommel now gold-embossed and the hilt bound with gold. He had a gilded helmet on his head and a red shield at his side on which a knight was traced in gold. He carried a lance in his hand, as is the custom in foreign lands. Whenever they took lodgings for the night, the womenfolk paid no heed to anything but to gaze at Bolli and his companions and all their finery." (Laxdaela saga, ch. 77)"
"So where does this mention armour? " - Dan

It doesn't, but it proves that Norsemen liked Byzantine bling - you would have to argue from some counteracting evidence that this would not also apply to Byzantine armour.

“Mail was THE most desirable armour by virtually every metal using culture in the world for almost two thousand years.” - Dan

What evidence do you have for this statement?

“The level of protection it provided is at least as good as lamellar. Comnena said that European mail was superior to Byzantine armour and rendered the wearer invulnerable to Byzantine arrows. Harald's mail was said to be invulnerable to all weapons. Why would these guys bother with Byzantine rubbish when they can get good quality mail?” - Dan

Anna Comnena also said that a Kelt (Norman) on horseback could break through the walls of Babylon, do we also credit this with literal truth? She was trying to excuse the poor performance of Byzantine troops against the Normans – probably much more due to their charging at speed with couched lances than any armour superiority.
In contrast to your assertion, Alexius I, presumably wearing the best of Byzantine armour protection available, was thrust at simultaneously from either side by lance-wielding Norman knights, and suffered no serious harm. In fact one Norman lance broke leaving the head embedded in the emperor's armour - not something that I can imagine ringmail on its own doing. Pretty damn good armour in my opinion. Have a word with Timothy Dawson about the protective qualities of his recreated Byzantine lamellar.

[Dan Howard]

“In contrast to your assertion, Alexius I, presumably wearing the best of Byzantine armour protection available, was thrust at simultaneously from either side by lance-wielding Norman knights, and suffered no serious harm. In fact one Norman lance broke leaving the head embedded in the emperor's armour - not something that I can imagine ringmail on its own doing. Pretty damn good armour in my opinion. Have a word with Timothy Dawson about the protective qualities of his recreated Byzantine lamellar.[/i]

Rubbish. Dawson couldn't find any evidence either so he just made that up. You'd be better served by doing your own research. Here is what Comnena really wrote about Dyrrakhion (from the Dawes translation):

Alexiad [4.6.110]

The battle did not come to an end because the Emperor still maintained his resistance, therefore three of the Latins, one of whom was Amicetas already mentioned, the second Peter, son of Aliphas, as he himself asserted, and a third, not a whit inferior to these two, took long spears in their hands and at full gallop dashed at the Emperor. Amicetas missed the Emperor because his horse swerved a little; the second man's spear the Emperor thrust aside with his sword and then bracing his arm, struck him on the collarbone and severed his arm from his body. Then the third aimed straight at his face, but Alexius being of firm and steadfast mind was not wholly dismayed, but with his quick wit grasped in the flash of an instant the thing to do, and when he saw the blow coming, threw himself backwards on to his horse's tail. Thus the point of the spear only grazed the skin of his face a little and then, hitting against the rim of the helmet, tore the strap under the chin which held it on and knocked it to the ground. After this the Frank rode past the man he thought he had hurled from his horse, but the latter quickly pulled himself up again in his saddle and sat there calmly without having lost a single weapon.

The first lance missed him completely because his horse moved.
Alexios parried the second lance with his sword
The third lance missed because Alexios ducked out of the way.

No mention of armour at all, except for his helmet being knocked off his head. He could have survived that encounter even if he was naked. Nowhere in her entire work does Comnena ever describe the armour that Alexios wore. And mail is perfectly capable of stopping a lance attack. I have previously given a list of primary sources demonstrating this.

[Dan Howard]

I'm thinking that Dawson confused two completely unrelated passages about two different battles and two different emperors. Here is Michael Psellos' Chronographia which talks about an attack on Isaac Komnenos in 1057 AD (24 years before Dyrrakhion).

Some of our men saw him (they were Scyths from the Taurus district, and not more than four at that) and attacked him with lances, driving in on both flanks, but the iron shafts proved ineffective... Meanwhile he budged in neither direction, for as they pushed him with equal force this way and that, he remained poised and balanced in the middle. To Isaac this seemed a favourable omen, when attacks from right and left both failed to dislodge him...

Even here there is no mention of armour. It is implied because he survived multiple lance hits unharmed but, as I have already said, mail is perfecty capable of stopping a lance thrust. He could have been wearing mail or lamellar but we have a lot more evidence of officers wearing mail than lamellar. There is no evidence for both being worn at once and the combination is not needed since either on its own is capable of stopping anything that might be expected on these battlefields. Only later, in the 13th-14th century, do you start to see armour commonly being layered - both in the West and in the East.

[Urselius]

Alexiad, Book 4 vii, Sewter translation. It comes just after the section you quoted, during Alexios' flight from the battlefield.

Having been attacked by Normans thrusting lances at his left side, which threatened to push him off his horse Alexios was then attacked by more lance-wielding Norman knights on his right side:

"The spear-points, thrust towards his right side suddenly straightened him [Alexios] and kept him in equilibrium. It was indeed an extraordinary sight. The enemies on on the left strove to push him off; those on the right plunged their spears at his flank, as if in competition with the first group, opposing spear to spear. Thus the emperor was kept upright between them...... Some of the barbarian's spears... which had pierced the emperor's clothing, remained there and were carried off with the horse when it jumped. Alexios quickly cut away these trailling weapons."

I would seriously consider retracting you previous assertion about Timothy Dawson making things up, as it is clearly untrue, objectionable on grounds of civility and might be actionable.

Anna Comnena was writing a biographical history and not a military manual, she makes very few comments on armour or military equipment. One of the few things she does say is that Alexius wore a helmet fitted with facial protection - presumably a full camail leaving only the eyes visible. However, the passage quoted above tells us a number of things of note. Alexios cannot have been using a shield to protect himself simultaneously on both sides. He therefore was reliant on his armour for protection. If he was being thrust at by a number of, persumably, brawny and well trained soldiers wielding sharp lances and took no serious hurt his armour must have been very effective.

Once again we have to use our common sense, we know that the Byzantines used quilted textile, ringmail, scale, splint and lamellar armour. Alexios may have worn a combination of any or all of these armour types. Certainly the spearpoints being caught up in his clothing implies that he was wearing a textile epilorikion. I would expect with ringmail that, presuming that lance points did not penetrate, there would be considerable trauma - bruising, internal bleeding, broken ribs - as the flexibility of mail does nothing to spread the force of an impact. In contrast, being semi-rigid, lamellar would spread the force of a lance-strike over a greater area and so give greater protection from trauma. The only injury Anna Comnena ascribes to Alexios after his exploits was a wound to the forehead.

We know considerably more about one martial society with access to both ringmail and lamellar armour than we know about Byzantium, pre-Modern Japan. The Japanese had both forms of armour and used them for different things, mail was largely used for mittens, forearm protection and limb armour generally, where it often articulated splint elements. For the torso, shoulders and upper legs lamellar was overwhelmingly used. If ringmail was far superior to lamellar then the Japanese were very stupid not to use it more extensively. We also know that the Japanese used armour elements in a flexible way depending on circumstances. If fighting on foot a samurai might leave off his leg armour, similarly if scouting or skirmishing he might not wear other elements of his armour. Having a similarly varied collection of armour elements it is logical to assume that Byzantine soldiers would also have used their armour in a similarly flexible way depending on circumstance. Contemporary Western European armour was much less sophisticated. A hauberk was a 'one trick pony', you could wear it or leave it off.

[Urselius]

And some fell on stony ground.

I have found a reference that says that both the Tactica of Leo VI and the Sylloge Tacticorum of Nikephoros Phokas mention that lamellar klivania could be worn over mail. I do not possess these works, so cannot assert the veracity of this claim.

From a snippet view of the Tactica online (George Dennis, trans.
Dumbarton Oaks, 2010) the following sentence is found:

p. 509 - "They shall have coats of mail and plate armor."

I do not know what the original terms are here but a combination of mail and another form of armour is clearly indicated.

[M. Val. Naso]

Why should they even wear anything but mail? Byzantine lamellar was not munitions armour. The best, the absolute finest, the heavy cavalry was advised to wear only klibania. (Praecepta of Phokas II, III.4)

Also, they were advised to wear zabai as skirts and arm guards. Only a few lines later the author advises the soldiers to wear several layers of zabai as face protection. In this context, we can take it as mail.

Taktika of Ouranos also states, that the enemy's menaulotoi will be useless because of the klibania.

They only wore mail as auxiliary protection. Were advised for klibania.

Conclusion in my view: klibania is not munitions armour.

[Caius Artorius Castus]

Mark,

Is it possible that there are different levels of klibania? There are clearly different quality of mail and other armours.

CAC

[Urselius]

There were certainly different levels of finish, a number of accounts describe emperors wearing gilded or golden armour.

A possible functional variation would have been in whether the individual lamellae were of a flat section or had embossed ridges or keels running down them. A lame with a longitudinal ridge or keel would have greater integral strength than a plain, flat lame. As raising a ridge on each lame would be expensive, from a time/workmanship/cost point of view, such armours would be limited to the richer soldier. Embossed lamellae have been excavated in a 10th century context in Bulgaria.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I think what happened is that it became like Segmentata/Musculata, where its the Artist's way of distinguishing between Romans and other enemies in their work. By representing your Saint with Lamellar Armor you show to the people (who would have thought of it as "Roman" in culture) that he is a Roman saint and leads a victorious Roman Army.

As they lost the ability to "Romanize" their weapons and tactics (that is, improve them to keep an edge over their enemy or at least distinguish themselves from their enemy) they increased their usage in art it seems, even though the people would not have seen it on a regular soldier anymore.

[Urselius]

There was definitely an archaic trend in Byzantine depictions of saints, no doubt klivania were chosen for devotional images precisely because they resembled muscle cuirasses in outline. However, even here contemporary styles and equipment are shown, a St Demetrios of the 12th century in an epilorikion-covered klivanion is depicted with the deep, straight-leg posture, heel lower than the toes in the stirrup, which indicates use of the couched lance technique.

Your thesis is somewhat undermined by the many manuscript illustrations (Skylitzes etc.) where Byzantine artists show Byzantine, Bulgarian, Armenian/Georgian, Rus and Saracen troops equipped identically - most wearing klivania. Only the written captions indicate what nation they originate from.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Well the illustrating of Klivanion with ptyreges and other decorations indicate they took these armors and put them in a "Roman style" to differentiate I think.

[etruschi]

Thanks for the many replies.
Can I conclude that such long mail hauberks have been used by Justinian elite troops or what should the cavalryman better be wearing?
A short mail shirt (long-sleeved) with scale torso protector (see picture of figure) in combination with laminated plate armor for the legs perhaps?
Should this laminated armor then cover his entire legs or only his thighs with splint armor greaves for his shins?

Andreas, can you please give the details of the forthcoming book you've illustrated. It seems very interesting. I saw that the book on Merovingians isn't available yet. Is it maybe this book?
Thanks

Etruschi