Armour in Byzantium in the early years of the Varangian

Guard, with special reference to limb defenses

Peter Beatson - NVG Miklagard

1. Introduction

Just before the time of the beginning of the Varangian Guard [1]

there were several military manuals written in Byzantium [2].

Some of them list the pieces of armour worn by the different

classes of infantry and cavalry soldiers. From these sources [3] it is

clear that arm and leg armour was not worn by infantry soldiers at

all.

2. Descriptions in the military manuals

The hoplitai (‘heavy’ infantry) who formed the bulk of the foot soldiers were deployed en masse in pike blocks. Essentially

a ‘mobile fortress’ for the offensive cavalry arm to sally from and retire to, they would engage in close combat only as a

last resort. Relying mainly on their large shields and a forest of points for protection, they wore a coat (kabadion) padded

with raw silk or cotton. In the first half of the 10th c. the sleeves of this coat extended to the wrist, providing some

protection for the lower arm. Later, the sleeves were shortened toward elbow length. In both cases the sleeves were slit and

buttoned so they could be folded back, presumably to prevent overheating on the march. They did not even have metal

helmets - only a thick felt cap (kamelaukion) worn under a turban (phakiolion). The infantry wore boots, which could be

supple and thigh-length, or thick (“doubled”) and knee-length, providing some leg protection.

The kaballarioi or ordinary cavalry wore helmets (kassidia) and a short klibanion (lamellar corslet) or lorikon (mail shirt),

legs were unprotected except again by boots, and speculatively by padded hose (toubia) [4]. Mounted archers also had

belted kabadia, padded coats with long and full skirts [5] screening their legs (and the flanks of their horse), probably as

they were not able to use their shield as cover from missiles while using the bow.

Around 950 a superheavy cavalry unit was formed - the klibanophori or kataphraktoi. Their entire body, and their horses as

well were armoured. Over their lamellar klibanion, which had elbow-length sleeves (manikia), they wore

an epilorikon,which was a padded surcoat. Their iron helmets (kassidas sideras) had doubled or tripled zabai (‘screens’, of

mail?) covering the whole face except the eyes. Both lower arms and thighs were protected by thickly padded silk or cotton guards, called manikelia [6] for the arms, and kremasmata for the legs, but reinforced by zabai, here possibly meaning

panels of mail [7] or strips/plates of leather or horn (or possibly metal). On the lower leg greaves (chalkotoubai) were worn

- their construction is not described and the term is a transference of an ancient one, originally referring to the solid bronze

ones worn by classical Greek hoplites.

3. Armour of the Emperor’s Varangians

The Varangians were an infantry unit, though of course an elite one. As they are not mentioned in the Byzantine manuals,

we can only guess that they were provided with somewhat better armour than the ordinary infantry. There is some later

evidence that they were a mounted infantry unit like English huscarls - that is, they rode to battle but fought on foot, as at

Dyrrhachion in 1081 [8]. This might allow them to have armour as heavy as the normal cavalryman - i.e. an iron helmet

and mail coat [9] or lamellar corslet. According to Anna Komnena [10], fatigue from their rapid advance and weight of

their armour contributed to their defeat by Robert Guiscard’s forces at Dyrrhachion.

4. Splinted armour and the Varangians

There are no archaeological remains of any arm and leg armours from Byzantium itself. Despite this, many popular works

present splinted limb armour as ‘typically Byzantine’, but in reality there is only a little evidence from art of the period to

suggest that splinted limb defenses could have been in use in the Balkans-Asia Minor region during the middle period of

the Empire (see below).

Given this lack of information, what then is behind the popular and ingrained depiction [11] of Varangian guardsmen

wearing splints on their arms and legs?

Several burials of fully equipped warriors have been excavated in Sweden, at Vendel and Valsgärde. One mound

(Valsgärde, grave 8) included splint-and-mail armour for one arm and both legs (see Catalogue, no. 2).

Authors and illustrators inspired by mentions of limb armour in the Byzantine military manuals (which, as we have already

seen, actually bear no relevance to infantry equipment) seem to have seized on this Scandinavian find to kit out their vision

of the “Viking” troops of the Empire’s best known battalion. Unfortunately the Valsgärde panoply dates to 635-650, long

before the Viking age, thus it can have no connection to the Varangian Guard.

5. Is there any evidence for the construction of

limb armour used in 10-11th c. Byzantium?

The manikelia of the kataphraktoi are described as being

made “of coarse silk or cotton as thick as can be stitched

together” [12]. Perhaps these [13] are the type of vambraces

worn by Goliath in a well-known 10th c. Armenian

carving(Fig. 1):

Figure 1 - ‘Goliath’, sculpted relief on exterior of the

Church of the Holy Cross, Aght’amar (Akdamar Adası)

in Lake Van, eastern Turkey. Armenian, 915-921. (source: Wikimedia Commons).

Earlier manuals do mention different armour for arms and

legs, but provide no detail beyond a name and the materials

that could be used: for example in Leo VI’s Taktika [14]

armguards (manikellia or cheiropsella) and

greaves(podopsella or chalkotouba) could be made of iron or

wood [15].

Returning to the question of possible use of splinted armour

in middle-era Byzantium: the neighbouring Khazar

khaganate was very advanced militarily, for example

supplementing mail or lamellar armour with large iron plates

as early as the 8-9th c. (see Catalogue, 4). It would not be

surprising if relations with Khazaria influenced development

of arms in either or both Byzantium [16] and Rus’. Some

parts of splinted limb defenses dated to the 9-10th c. were

discovered in the Northern Caucasus near Pyatigorsk

(modern-day Russia: see Catalogue, 5).

A well-known depiction on a jug from the Nagyszentmiklós treasure [17] shows

a Khazarian-style mounted warrior with

splinted vambraces and greaves (Fig. 2):

Figure 2 - Mounted warrior, on Jug 2

from the Nagyszentmiklós treasure

(Romania) in the Kunsthistorisches

Museum, Vienna. (source: Lásló and Rácz, p.54).

Enough detail is shown to speculate that

they are made of tapered strips fitted

together and edged with leather bindings,

resembling a pair of splinted greaves

excavated from a 5th c. BC Scythian [18]

tomb at Nymphaeum in the Crimea

(seeCatalogue, 1).

The illuminated Synopsis Historion of

Iohannes Skylitzes [19] has a depiction

of cavalryman with leg armour which has

been described as splints in one

publication [20], but with a clearer image

it is seen to actually be made of smaller

elements, like scales or lamellae (Fig.

3a).

A second rider in the same scene

confirms this (Fig. 3b):

Figure 3a - Madrid Skylitzes, fol. 195v. detail - Georgian

ruler George I retreating before the Byzantine army

commanded by Emperor Basil II, an event of 1021-22. (source: Wikimedia Commons).

Figure 3b - Madrid Skylitzes, fol. 195v. detail - at the rear

of the pursuing forces, Basil II wears similar leg armour

to George I. (source: Wikimedia Commons).

A series of luxury ivory ikons showing the Deesis (Christ enthroned with intercessors, here including rows of saints and

martyrs) was produced in Constantinople over the course of a century [21]. The “Harbaville Triptych” is the latest known

in the series (Fig. 4). The armoured military saints have ‘petals’ at the top of their boots or leggings - realistic detail or

artistic flourish? Perhaps these are the tops of splinted greaves worn beneath the footwear...

Figure 4 - Military saints on the “Harbaville Triptych”: carved ivory ikon, Constantinople mid 11th c. Left, detail -

the two Saints Theodoros, teron and stratelates. Right, detail - Saints Georgios and Eustathios. (source: Wikimedia Commons).

6. In conclusion - authentic limb armour for re-enactment combat

Only specialised troops wore limb defenses in this period. Apart from the klibanophorii already mentioned, Kolias [22]

gives an example of how transport ships were equipped for the invasion of Crete in 949 - although there was body and head

armour for up to 140 men per vessel, only 8 pairs of cheiropsella were included [23], plausibly just for the helmsmen and

fire-siphon operators. Unless recreating special units it seems limb protection (whether splint armour or otherwise) is not

appropriate for accurate representation of the typical Byzantine soldier [24].

Historic clothing by itself can have distinct protective value [25], but it is good to have extra armour of some kind for

safety in our reenactment foot combats [26]. In Miklagard NVG, the preference should be to have arm and leg protection

hidden underneath clothing. Thus we can look authentic, but suffer less bruises!

As there is no specific authentic source to follow for Varangian guardsman, the second-best option may be to look to

Byzantine military texts of the period and make the manikelia of composite construction they describe. The obvious

drawback is that there are no original examples to copy.

Splinted armour is probably the next best choice. We have both archaeological and iconographic evidence that it was used

by neighbouring cultures in the period, so it is reasonable to suppose that it transferred to Byzantium, although we have no

firm proof.

Finally, copy a bazuband, or other similar pre-modern protection as your inspiration - at least it will be a functional design

tested in battle, but make sure any materials, technology or artistic embellishments (such as an engraved pattern) that would

mark it as anachronistic are replaced by those from our culture and period. Keep it unobtrusive, and if asked, make sure you

point out to new members and public that it is a non-authentic piece of gear worn for safety reasons.

A catalogue of early medieval limb armours

and comparative material

1. Splinted greave from Nymphaeum (Crimean peninsula), Ukraine.

Date: 5th c. BC.

Find: Assigned to ‘Tomb VI’ of an uncontrolled excavation of Scythian tumuli.

Figure 5 - Nymphaeum, splinted bronze greave. (source: Vickers, Pl. XVI-b).

Description: Only one of the pair excavated still survives. Total length 20.4 cm, the narrower end is shaped

(to fit over the foot?). It is made of thirteen tapered bronze splints joined to each other with bronze wire

‘staples’ through paired holes in a staggered arrangement, this also serves to hold them to a leather backing

(sheep/goatskin). The splints look like they overlap and their exposed edges appear to be turned under

slightly. All edges were bound with a strip of calfskin, for which closely spaced holes were punched

through the metal, though the leather is well preserved whatever lacing was used appears to have perished.

In use the greave probably was slipped inside a boot or legging. According to Vickers’ description, there are

no traces of straps for attaching it to the leg, but he does not account for large holes at each corner at the

narrow end which clearly show in the photograph - see Fig. 5.

Held: Ashmolean Museum, Oxford UK.

References: Vickers, p.45.

2. Splinted limb armour from Valsgärde, Uppland, Sweden.

Date: 635-650AD.

Find: Grave 8 - richly furnished boat grave of a Migration Age Germanic warrior including a helmet, and

mail and splint armour (Fig. 6), and including equestrian equipment.

Figure 6 - Reconstruction of Valsgärde 8

panoply. (source: Engström, fig. 6).

Figure 7 - Valsgärde 8, splints of Group 1

armguard. (drawing: PB, after Arwidsson 1954 pl. 7).

Description: The armour had been folded up and stored together in a wooden casket in the burial. A total of

21 iron splints and fragments of leather straps which originally connected them were found. The splints

could be sorted into three groups of seven each, based on length and number of straps. Group 1 (Fig.

7)were the shortest (23.5 to 27.4 cm), and were riveted by 1 or 2 domed bronze nails to two thin straps (1.5

cm wide). Five splints were broad and tapered while the other two were narrow and more or less even

width. Each was bent upward at the wide end while their narrow end is formed into a dragon-head with

features outlined in slight relief, a small iron ring is inserted through each ‘nostril’. The wider splints are

otherwise unembellished while the narrow ones are covered in cross-wise grooves.

Figure 8 - Valsgärde 8, splints of Group 2 left

leg. (drawing: PB, after Arwidsson 1954 pl. 8).

Figure 9 - Valsgärde 8, splints of Group 3 right

leg. (drawing: PB, after Arwidsson 1954 pl. 9).

Group 2 (Fig. 8) were 33-34 cm long, all more-or-less rectangular with a slight taper, though one has one

scalloped and one straight edge. Both ends are slightly bent outward. There are four broad splints which

have a pair of lines cut parallel to the edges, alternating with three narrower ones which are again marked

with (diagonal) hatching. At the narrower end are from 2 to 4 holes for rings linking them to a mail

garment. Though they all have five matching rows of 2, 3 or 4 bronze rivets, only the top, middle and

bottom rows were functional, attaching them to three leather staps (1.2 to 1.6 cm width).

Group 3 (Fig. 9) is pretty much a mirror-image of

Group 2, though slightly longer (35.5 to 36.7 cm) and

the system for attaching them to mail differs - the end

of each splint is bent over and has notches filed into it,

wherein the rings are fitted and held in place with a

piece of wire (Fig. 10):

Figure 10 - Valsgärde 8, attachment of mail to

splints (left) Groups 1 & 2;(right) Group 3 (source:

Arwidsson 1954, fig. 19).

Group 1 is currently interpreted as a forearm guard with attached mail hand protection, and Groups 2 & 3 as

shin guards with attached mail foot protection. Also found were two small bronze buckles and six small iron

buckles, which fastened the straps of the arm and leg armour respectively.

Held: Gustavianum, Uppsala University Sweden.

References: Arwidsson (1939 & 1954); Engström.

3. Armoured gauntlet(s) from Langobardic cemetary at Castel Trosino, central Italy.

Date: 7th c. AD.

Find: Grave 119 - tomb of a fully equipped warrior, including Avar or Byzantine lamellar corselet and

helmet.

Description: A small rectangular patch of mail that apparently covered the back of the hand. Whatever it

was attached to (leather glove?) has disappeared. Size about 11 by 8 cm, made of several rows of round

section mail. Two similar are displayed seperately in the museum, but it is not clear if both originated in

grave 119.

Held: Museo nazionale dell’ Alto Medioevo, Rome (pers. obs. 1994).

4. Plate greave(s) from Kuban or Khazar cemetary at Borisov, Russia.

Date: 8-9th c. AD.

Find: Burial near Gelendzhik, in Krasnodar krai on the northeastern coast of the Black Sea (modern-day

Russia). A helmet; mail armour; greave(s); two arm/shoulder guards; and weapons were placed together in

a large pot.

Figure 11 - Borisov, greave: (left) front

plate; (right) rear plate. (drawing:

PB);(below) reconstruction as tubular

greave.(source: Gorelik, pl. XI-5).

Description: Iron armour for lower leg, made of

anatomically-formed solid plates. Fragment 1 (Fig. 11,

left) protected the shin - a narrow but solid strip with

pronounced ‘V’ section; the top end expands slightly to a

‘T’-shape and the lower end curves outward near the

ankle; along the sides six pairs of lugs to which (a)

poorly-preserved thinner plate(s) is/are attached with

prominent rivets. Fragment 2 (Fig. 11, right) from the

rear, a single thin plate, anatomically moulded as the calf

muscle. In its current state it would reach only part way

around to the back of the leg - possibly an accident of

preservation (or was it designed to protect only the

exposed outer side of the calf?); some holes, which may

be attachment points (or just corrosion) - according to

Gorelik the front and back parts were joined by loops on

the outer side of the leg and straps on the inside

(reconstruction - Fig. 11, below).

Held: Not known, possibly Moscow Historical Museum.

References: Exhibition - “Horse and Rider” at Musée

Guimet (Musée nationale des arts Asiatiques, Paris),

2003, documented with photographs on the Tozhe Gorod

website ; Gorelik, p.135, plate IX-5 ; Nicolle & McBride

[27], p.11, 45.

Comment: Similar greaves are seen in Chinese paintings

of the period, possibly their ultimate source [27]. Viewed

in this context a slightly earlier painting of an armoured

equestrian figure from the Central Asian kingdom of

Sogdia (Fig. 12) might conceivably show solid

armguards of semicylindrical plates, an early ancestor of

the bazuband:

Figure 12 - Part of wooden shield covered with painted parchment, width 61 cm [27]. Qalai Mugh

(120km east of Samarkhand, modern-day Tajikistan), Sogdian, 7-8th c.

5. Parts of Khazarian splint armour from Koz'i Skaly, Russia.

Date: 9-10th c. AD?

Find: Various pieces of Khazarian armour plus weapons found on Koz'i Skaly, a peak of Mount Beshtau in

Stavropolsky krai, near Pyatigorsk (in modern-day Russia).

Figure 13 - Koz'i Skaly: (above) splint from vambrace; (below) splint from greaves. (source: Kuznetsov & Rudnicki).

Description: Only one large splint from a greave and one smaller from a vambrace are shown (Fig. 13).

Both appear to have been riveted to pairs of leather straps (a similar construction to Catalogue, 2). The

greave splint is reflexively curved which could conceivably fit a rider in bent-legged position but seems

impractical for standing - possibly this is post-depositional damage. The vambrace broadens at both ends

and is bent out, presumably to accomodate the joints.

Held: not known.

References: Kuznetsov & Rudnicki; Gorelik, p.140, plate IX-5. Acknowledgements to “Tozhe Forum”

internet forum.

Got some other examples? Please let me know!

BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, J.C. (1997). ‘The Madrid Chronicle of John Skylitzes’ (cat. no. 338), in H.C. Evans & W.D. Wixom (eds.) The Glory of Byzantium: Art

and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era A.D. 843-1261. Metropolitan Museum of Art: New York, p.501-02.

Arwidsson, G. (1939). Armour of the Vendel period. Acta Archaeologica 10, 31-59.

Arwidsson, G. (1954). Valsgärde 8 (Die Gräberfunde von Valsgärde, II). Almqvist & Wiksell: Uppsala.

Dain, A. (1938). Sylloge tacticorum, quae olim “Inedita Leonis Tactica” dicebatur. Société d’Édition «Les Belles Lettres»: Paris.

Dawson, T. (2002). Suntagma hoplôn: the equipment of regular Byzantine troops, c.950 to c.1204, in: D. Nicolle (ed.), Companion to Medieval

Arms and Armour, p.81-90. Boydell: Bury St Edmunds.

Dennis, G.T. (2010). The Taktika of Leo VI. (Dumbarton Oaks Texts 12). Dumbarton Oaks: Washington DC.

Engström, J. (1997). The Vendel chieftains: a study of military tactics, in: A. Nørgård Jørgensen & B.L. Clausen (eds.) Military Aspects of

Scandinavian Society in a European Perspective, AD 1-1300, p.248-55. National Museum of Denmark: Copenhagen.

Evans, H.C. & W.D. Wixom (1997). The Glory of Byzantium: Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era A.D. 843-1261.Metropolitan Museum of

Art: New York.

Franklin, S. & A. Cutler (1991). ‘Varangians’, in A.P. Khazdan (ed.) Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, vol. 3. Oxford University: New York,

Oxford, p.2152.

Gorelik, M. (2002). Arms and armour in south-eastern Europe in the second half of the first millenium AD, in: D. Nicolle (ed.),Companion to

Medieval Arms and Armour, p.127-49. Boydell: Bury St Edmunds.

Haldon, J.F. (1975). Some aspects of Byzantine military technology from the sixth to the tenth centuries. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 1,

p.11-47.

Heath, I. (1979). Byzantine Armies 886-1118 (Men-at-Arms 89). Osprey: London.

Hitti, P.K. (trans.) (1929). An Arab-Syrian Gentleman and Warrior in the Period of the Crusades: Memoirs of Usamah ibn-Munquidh. (Series -

Records of Western Civilization). Columbia University Press: New York (reprinted 2000).

Ierusalimskaja, A.A. and B. Borkopp (1996). Von China nach Byzanz: Frümittelalterliche Seiden aus der Staatlichen Ermitage Sankt

Petersburg. Bayerisches Nationalmuseum: Munich.

James, S. (2004). Excavations at Dura Europos 1928-1937. Final Report VII: The Arms and Armour and Other Military Equipment.British

Museum: London.

Jeffreys, E. (1998). Digenis Akritis: the Grottaferrata and Escorial versions. (Cambridge Medieval Classics 12). Cambridge University: Cambridge.

Kalavrezou, I. (1997). ‘Triptych Icon with the Deesis and Saints’ (cat. no. 79), ‘The Harbaville Triptych’ (cat. no. 80), in H.C. Evans & W.D.

Wixom (eds.) The Glory of Byzantium: Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era A.D. 843-1261. Metropolitan Museum of Art: New York,

p.131-4.

Kirpitchnikov, A.N. (1971). Drevnerusskoe Oruzhie 3: Dospekh, komplekhs boevykh sredstv IX-XIII vv. Arkheologiia SSSR (Akademiia nauk

SSSR, Institut Arkheologii). Nauka: Leningrad.

Kolias, T.G. (1988). Byzantinische Waffen: ein Beitrag zur Byzantinischen Waffenkunde von den Anfängen bis zur Lateinischen

Eroberung (Byzantina Vindobonensia, vol. 17). Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Vienna 1988.

Kuznetsov, V.A. and R.R. Rudnicki (1998). Poselenie “Koz'i Skaly” u g. Beshtau. Materialy po izucheniiu istoriko-kul'turnogo naslediia

Stavropol'skogo Kraia 1.

László, G. and I. Rácz (1977). Der Goldschatz von Nagyszentmiklós. Corvina Kiadó: Budapest.

Luttwak, E.N. (2009). The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire. Harvard University: Cambridge MA.

Magnusson, M and H. Pálsson. (transl.) (1966). King Harald’s Saga. Penguin Classics (reprinted 1984).

Medvedev, A.F. (1959). Oruzhie Novgoroda velikogo. Material’y i issledovaniia po Arkheologiia SSSR 65, p.121-191.

McGeer, E. (1995). Sowing the Dragon’s Teeth: Byzantine Warfare in the Tenth Century (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 33). Dumbarton Oaks:

Washington DC.

Nicolle, D. and A. McBride (1992). Romano-Byzantine Armies 4th-9th Centuries (Men-at-Arms 247). Osprey: London.

Oberhelman, S.M. (transl. & ed.) (1991). The Oneirocriticon of Achmet: A Medieval Greek and Arabic Treatise on the Interpretation of

Dreams. Texas Tech University: Lubbock TX.

Pryor, J.H. & E.M. Jeffreys (2006). The Age of the Dromon: The Byzantine Navy ca 500-1204 (The Medieval Mediterranean 62). Brill: Leiden.

Sewter, E.R. (transl.) (1969). The Alexiad of Anna Comnena. Penguin Classics (reprinted 1988).

Vickers, M. (1979). Scythian Treasures in Oxford. Ashmolean Museum: Oxford.

NOTES [1] The year of the formal inauguration of the ‘Imperial Varangians’ guard unit is debatable, the mainstream position is 988 (eg. Franklin & Cutler)

but anyway it is likely to be within a couple of decades either side of 1000. PB (back)

[2] I acknowledge of course that the label ‘Byzantine Empire’ is a neologism, and its inhabitants justifiably called themselvesRhomaioi, ‘Romans’,

not ‘Byzantines’. With due respect to modern scholars who prefer to use more accurate terms like Rhomania, or ‘the continuing Eastern Roman

Empire’, I have used the more generally familiar ‘Byzantium’, which thanks to their efforts is now largely devoid of the negative associations it

used to conjure. PB. (back)

[3] Most relevant information comes from two manuals:

1. Nikephoros II Phokas (Emperor), c.965: Stratigiki Ekthesis kai Syntaxis Nikephorou Despotou (‘Presentation and Composition on Warfare of the

Emperor Nikephoros’); commonly referred to as Praecepta Militaria; for Greek text and English translation see McGeer, p.12-59.

2. Anonymus, c.950: Sylloge Taktikon (‘Compendium of Tactics’); Greek text - Dain; no full translation in English is available (J. Haldon, in

prep.?); some extracts discussed in McGeer. (back)

[4] Dawson, p.83. Although padded toubia (probably those called kamptotoubia: Gk. kampos = ‘country’ or ‘rustic’) are not specified in the military

texts, they are described in a Byzantine dream interpretation book, the Oneirokritikon of ‘Achmet’, c.10th c., §242: ‘From the Persians, concerning

shoes, toubia, and trousers’ - “... if the toubia and their padding were made of wool, <the dreamer> will effortlessly get proportionate wealth from

an official; if of cotton, he will aquire wealth from a gracious homeowner; if of raw silk, the wealth will be less but more splendid.” Oberhelman,

p.216-7. See also footnote 25. (back)

[5] Dawson, p.87. (back)

[6] Alternatively called cheiropsella in Nikephoros Ouranos’ Taktikon of c.1000 (§60), which here mostly follows the earlierPraecepta (see note

3 above) in its descriptions. McGeer, p.114-15. (back)

[7] For an instructive, though early example of this type of zaba, see Catalogue, 3 - but note that at the time when this item was

deposited, zaba designated an entire coat of mail: Haldon, p.24. (back)

[8] Anna Komnene (princess) c.1150, Alexiad, Book IV-vi. Sewter, p.146. (back)

[9] By 1066 the Norwegian king Harald hardrada owned an unusually long and strong coat of mail dubbed Emma, reaching below the knee (King

Harald’s Saga, ch.91: Magnusson and Pálsson, p.151). No source, however, states that he obtained it during his Byzantine service (c.1035-44), and

there is no compelling reason to suspect so - it must after all be the royal perogative to have the finest equipment in any case! PB. (back)

[10] Alexiad, Book IV-vi. Sewter, p.147. (back)

[11] Heath, p.38, Plate F. (back)

[12] Praecepta Militaria ΙΙΙ,4: McGeer, p.34-5. (back)

[13] Alternatively they could be constructed of laminated metal plates with leather edge bindings, like a partial 3rd c. limb defence (James, cat. no.

446) from Dura Europos, Syria - this is a late witness to the strong tradition of laminated armour use in late Hellenistic and imperial Roman armies

(James, p.126-28), but it seems there was no continuity into our period. It is generally believed that laminated construction was reintroduced into

Europe by the 13th c. Mongol incursions - for this, and for evidence of laminated armour in pre-Mongol Rus’, see Kirpitchnikov, p.15-18;

Medvedev, p.175-182. (back)

[14] c.900. Commonly referred to as the ‘Tactica of Leo the Wise’, Emperor Leo VI wrote Ton en Polemois Taktikon Syntomos Paradosis (‘Short

Instruction of the Tactics of War’), intending it to be a practical manual. Although he sought the advice of his generals, he mostly rehashes

Maurikos’ Strategikon (early 7th c.) and Classical military manuals, so it may not reflect the then current practise of warfare. For Greek text and

English translation, see Dennis. (back)

[15] When describing the skoutatos heavy infantry equipment (Constitution VI, 21: Dennis, p.92-3) Leo gives these two names for armguards,

which are generically called cheiromanika, to be made of iron or wood. It is not clear whether these are actually two different types of armguard,

and if so that the distinction was due to the materials they were made of - though, if the given order of names matches that of the materials, it

contradicts the definition provided at Const. VI,3 where he indicates that cavalryman’scheiropsella are cheiromanika sidera, ‘iron armguards’

(Dennis, p.84-85). Likewise the two names for greaves (generically calledperiknemidas). Given the natural properties of wood, splints are probably

the most practical construction in this material. PB. (back)

[16] The two armies may anyway have not been much different - the Roman system of antiquity had already been completely transformed by

adoption of steppe tactics and equipment from the Huns, then the Avars (Luttwak, p.56-9). One possible example of transfer of Khazar military

innovation is ‘shield fences’ around encampments (noted by Abu Said Gardizi, an 11th c. Persian historian drawing on 9th c. sources: Gorelik,

p.140), also used by the Byzantines from the 10th c. (the skoutaroma: McGeer, p.350). PB. (back)

[17] A disputed set of gold tableware discovered in modern-day Romania, and displaying features of Sassanian Persian, Byzantine and Central

Asian art - different authorities have assigned it to the Avars, Bulgarians, Khazars or Hungarians, with dates ranging from the 6th to the end of the

10th century. Held - Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (Austria). (back)

[18] The Scythians probably invented splint armour, which is well-attested both in art of the period and in the archaeological record. PB. (back)

[19] Currently scholarly consensus holds that the ms. was produced in southern Italy (Palermo?), and should be dated 1150-75 (Anderson,

1997). Held - Biblioteca Nacionale, Madrid (Vitr. 26-2). (back)

[20] Heath, p.11. (back)

[21] The Harbaville triptych is held in the Louvre, Paris (inv. no. OA 3247: Kalavrezou 1997, cat. no. 80). The series’ prototype is held in the

Palazzo Venezia (Venice), dated c.950. A third triptych of intermediate date is kept at the Vatican (Museo Sancta della Biblioteca Apostolia: inv.

no. 2441: Kalavrezou 1997, cat. no. 79). (back)

[22] Kolias, p.65-9. (back)

[23] ‘The expedition which took place against the island of Crete and the arming of both the ships and the cavalry under Constantine and Romanos,

the Emperors born in the purple, faithful in Christ, in indiction seven’, recorded by Constantine VIIPorphyrogennitos c.949, incorporated in de

Cerimoniis. Note that in this troop transport role, the dromon’s crew plus passengers totalled 300. Pryor & Jeffreys, [b].II 1-22 (p.556-7). (back)

[24] The very untypical (and legendary) Byzantine hero Digenis Akritis disdained to don armour, whether fighting men (even whole armies!), beasts

or monsters - so it is interesting that he wears his manikin (bracers) when fencing with a most dangerous band of outlaws (Digenis, Grottaferrata

version Book 6: Jeffreys, p.161). Although the setting of Digenis is the Arab-Byzantine frontier of the 9-10th c. our earliest known version was

written c.1300, and it incorporates some later material (Jeffreys, p.xli). (back)

[25] For example, the experience of a Kurdish huntsman, witnessed and related by ibn-Munqidh (Syrian, c.12th): ‘The lion came towards Zahr-al-

Dawlah while he lay prostrate on the ground. He lifted his leg high and the lion bit at it. We rushed at the lion, killed it and pulled the man out safe

and sound. Then we said to him, “O Zahr-al-Dawlah, why didst thou lift thy leg to the mouth of the lion?” He replied: “My body, as you see it, is

thin and lean; and I have on me only a garment and a tunic. There is nothing in me better clothed than my foot, with its stockings, boots and

leggings. I therefore thought that I would keep the lion busy with it rather than my ribs, hand or head until such time as Allah (exalted is he!) should

provide relief.”’ (from Hitti, p.116).

A silk-covered kaftan excavated from 8-9th c. Alanic graves at Moschevaya Balka (northwestern Caucasus) had two interlayers in the sleeves = silk

outer / raw linen / leather / linen lining (Hermitage, St. Petersburg: inv. no. Kz 6733: Ierusalimskaja & Borkopp, cat. no. 3, p.22-23). (back)

[26] There is no mention of soldiers wearing gloves in any source either, but it would be extremely unwise for us to go without these!

Possibly manikelia incorporated protection for the hands as well as lower arms? PB. (back)

[27] In this reference the location is called Gendjik or Tuapse, and the reconstruction is different, but it is almost certainly the Borisov find. (back)

[28] Source: Fine Art Images (back)

‘Armour in Byzantium in the early years of the Varangian Guard, with special reference to limb defenses’, written and webbed by Peter Beatson. (c) Birka Traders 2011-12. Not to be copied without permission.

All rights to materials in any linked pages belong to their respective owners.