Based on the tactics of the Byzantine troops, including those described in the Strategies, the key principle of the conduct of hostilities was reduced to skirmishes and attempts not to converge hand-to-hand for as long as possible. But, for example, the decision of King Totila not to use bows and arrows, but only spearmen, in the battle of Tagin in 552 cost him a victory. The battle on the Kasulina River in 553 (present-day Volturno) was won by Narses, among other things, due to the fact that the horse-drawn arrows on the flanks shot the "pig" of Alemanni and Franks with impunity.
Archers-riders (ίπpotoξόταί) accounted for, according to the Strategicon of Mauritius, two-thirds of all cursors. Cursors are frontline riders who are involved in pursuing the enemy. The presence of protective weapons - forgotten, which made it possible for cavalrymen to alternately fight with a spear or a bow, in principle, made all horsemen soldiers-arrows. Agathius of Myrene spoke about this:
"Horsemen were placed at the edges on either side, armed with spears and light shields, swords and bows, some with sarissa."
The shooters were in protective armor and without it, as Fiofilakt Samokitta wrote:
“They weren't wearing armor because they didn't know what they were going to face. Neither the helmets covered their heads, nor the armor protected their breasts to repel the iron with iron - there was no such guard of bodies, going along with the guarded and accompanying him; a glorious feat forced them to weaken their vigilance, and the victory of heroes, strong in spirit, does not know how to teach caution."
Stratiots entered service with their own weapons and equipment for shooting, called toxopharethra, while equipment and clothing were provided by the state.
Toxopharetra, or, in Old Russian, saadak, is a bow, arrows and items for their storage, a quiver and a bow. Some of the items for storage could be inseparable, made up a single complex: the quiver and the pouches made up one case.
Actually, the bow of the 6th century, the technical details of which were borrowed from the northern nomads: Sarmatians and Huns, was complex, its parts were made of horn. It was inferior in size to the Persian and Hunnic. Such a bow can be clearly seen on a silk medallion (patch on clothes) from the Hermitage: two horsemen with medium-sized bows hunt tigers. Judging by the images that have come down to us (the Great Imperial Palace, the Basilica on Mount Nebo, the Egyptian plate from Tire, mosaics from Madaba, Jordan), the bow was 125-150 cm long, depending on who used it: “bows on the strength of everyone. For comparison, the traditional complex bow of the Huns was ≈160 cm, and the more technological, Avar, ≈110 cm. The effort depended on the strength of the arrow, the strength of the bow and bowstring. The arrows were 80-90 cm long. In the quiver, according to the military instruction, there should have been 30-40 arrows.
The warriors were obliged to take care of the safety of the bowstring, to have a spare, to protect them from dampness. Anonymous VI century. recommended shooting not in a straight line, but on a tangent, excluding shooting at the legs of horses. At the same time, the shooting had to be aimed, and not at the attachment, as they like to portray in modern historical films. Moreover, such a density of shooting, as shown in modern films, could not be. The arrows fired at the attachment, being reflected by the shields, did not hit anywhere.
The bow was pulled in two ways: Roman and Persian. The first one is “ring fingers”: thumb and forefinger, but not closing, as in the mosaic from the Great Imperial Palace. The second is with three closed fingers. To protect parts of the hands during shooting, wrist bracelets and a thumb ring were used. Anonymous VI century. believed that in case of fatigue, the shooter should be able to fire with three medium hands, like the Persians: “The Romans always shoot arrows more slowly [unlike the Persians - V. E.], but since their bows are extremely strong and taut, and to besides, the arrows themselves are stronger people, their arrows harm those they hit much more often than it happens with the Persians, since no armor can withstand the force and swiftness of their blow."
Good archers
The commander Belisarius, comparing the Roman cavalry with the Gothic, noted: "… the difference is that almost all the Romans and their allies, the Huns, are good archers from bows on horseback, and from the Goths, no one is familiar with this matter."
“They,” wrote Procopius about the Roman horsemen, “are excellent riders and can easily draw a bow at full gallop and shoot arrows in both directions, both at the enemy running from them and at the enemy pursuing them. They raise the bow to the forehead, and pull the bowstring up to the right ear, which is why the arrow is launched with such power that it always hits the one it hits, and neither the shield nor the shell can ward off its swift blow."
Types of clothing
As part of the article about horsemen, I would like to dwell on two types of their clothing, mentioned in sources, but not having an unambiguous explanation in the historical literature. It is about himation and gunia.
Gimatius - this is outerwear, which some researchers consider a cloak, which is much larger than the chlamydia, and in which, if necessary, could be wrapped tightly. Others see him as a special, under-armor tunic.
In the 6th century, and even later, he originally meant simply a cloak or pallium, as in the late Roman era. During the famine, during the siege, in Rome in 545, the father of the family, covering his face with himation, i.e. cloak, rushed into the Tiber. From the "Book of Eparch" we know that himation is a synonym for a cloak; himation is mentioned in the tactics of Leo of the 10th century. Byzantine iconography, and not only the 6th century, gives us a lot of images of saints and mere mortals in cloaks like himation or pallium. So, in Saint Vitale, we see figures both in flowing cloaks and in cloaks used in the manner of a himation, that is, wrapped around the body.
Thus, firstly, in the VI century. it is a cloak, in the form of a rectangular piece of fabric, with a rectangular cutout for the head, with only the right hand open and the cloak completely closed with the left hand, although, of course, it could also be used as a penula, in which both hands could be opened (Bishop Maximin from Saint Vitale in Ravenna).
Secondly, in the 6th century, himation is defined as under-armor clothing, “overcoat”. Anonymous 6th century, wrote that the protective weapons
“One should not put on directly on the underwear [chiton], as some do, trying to reduce the weight of the weapon, but on a himation, not less than a finger thick, so that, on the one hand, the weapon tightly fits the body, at the same time does not injure it with its rigid contact”.
Mauritius contrasts this type of clothing with a raincoat or cape:
"Gimatiy, that is, Zostarii made according to the Avar model, either from flax, or from goat hair, or from other woolen fabric, should be spacious and free so that they can cover the knees while riding and therefore have a good appearance."
The explanation, perhaps, gives us the Old Russian period. In the Ostromir Gospel, the himation was translated as a robe (felon). Thus, himation is not only the general name of the cloak, but also the name of a garment similar to a robe: a cloak close to Penulla, with a cutout in the middle of the fabric for the head. Thus, its use as an under-armor garment is quite understandable: he dressed over his head, belted and he could be put on armor, he allowed to cover his knees when riding a horse.
What equipment was used over the armor?
Equipment over armor
Mauritius wrote that
“Riders should take care that when they are fully armed, in armor and have bows with them, and if, as it happens, it rains or the air becomes damp with moisture, then, putting on these gunia over the armor and bows, they can protect their weapons, but they would not be restricted in their movements if they wanted to use either bows or spears."
In most of the later "Strategies", the "cloak" covering armor and weapons, and the rider himself, has the same description as gunia, but it is called differently. In the text of the Emperor Leo, we find the name éplorica - “on lorica” (Éπιλωρικια). Nicephorus II Phocas in the Novels and Strategists calls it epoloric (Éπλωρικα): “And on top of the Clevans wear a cape with coarse silk and cotton. And from the armpits to leave their sleeves. The sleeves hang on the back of their shoulders. " In the work "On Combat Escort" we read: "… troops dressed in armor and capes, called epanoclibans." Such a cloak-cape in Russia was called ohoben (ohaben), and among the Arabs - burnus.
This cape came to the Romans, like many other garments, from the east, from the horsemen. Archaeological finds suggest that this cloak could have been not only of coarse materials, but also of higher quality, expensive fabrics: such a light cloak of the 7th century. from Antinouopolis (Egypt), made of blue-green cashmere with silk trim.
Gunia, therefore, is a wide, cavalry cloak, with or without sleeves and slots for hands, roughly made of felt, silk or cotton, with or without a hood, a similar cloak in the infantry was called kavadia (καβάδιον).
This article is the final in a cycle of consideration of the Byzantine horsemen of the 6th century. according to historical sources. A logical continuation will be articles on the famous Roman infantry at the new historical stage of the 6th century, the stage of the restoration of the Roman Empire.
