Cataprachts?

[Gnostiko]

WOW. Is there any battlefield account of these guys? Must've been terrifying when you stab him, then he doesn't even flinch.

Leo the Deacon makes some references to them breaking Russian cavalry in the war against Sviatoslav I.
Funny you should say that about not flinching; at the battle of Dyrrakhion in 1081, Alexios I was armoured as described above, a charge from 3 Norman knights struck home but none of the lances penetrated his armour, he was almost unhorsed but getting caught in his riding gear. A charge from another direction simply pushed him back into his saddle and he was able to escape the carnage.

That little snippet from the Alexiad was considered poetic license by earlier historians until modern tests demonstrated the truth of it.

[DC53]

Did the Emperor fight as a cataphract? Or do Emperors traditionally have that heavy armor?

[Gnostiko]

As a heavy cavalryman? Depends entirely on the whim of the Emperor in question; in the case of Alexios, he was a soldier-Emperor and often took to the field, personally engaging in combat.

As for wearing the whole getup Klivanophoroi wore, again, depends on the Emperor's preferences. No doubt it was the best defence an Emperor could wear if he planned to engage in personal combat, but the wearer was prone to overheating quickly, it was time consuming to put on and take off, and the weight of the armour could potentially stymie a hasty retreat.

[DC53]

I read somewhere that there were a type of composite lancer-horsearcher, and that that was how cataphracts fought, shooting bows from long range then switching to their lances for the charge. Is there any truth to this?

[Gnostiko]

There is; from at least the time of Velisarios there were combined lancer/archer formations. Nikephoros Phokas in his Praecepta Militaria insisted the majority of cavalry units should function in such a fashion, with the Klivanophoroi operating as tank-like shock cavalry.

[DC53]

So were klivanophoroi the center of a Byzantine army? Or were they more of an add-on, like skirmishers are in a Napoleonic army?

[Gnostiko]

Kataphraktoi, Klivanophoroi, horse archers - all cavalry was the focus and the fulcrum of the medieval Roman army.

[DC53]

When did infantry start to decline in importance? And how? Weren't the Romans the only professional army for a while?

[Gnostiko]

The beginning was the catastrophic loss at the Battle of Adrianople in 378, where the last remnants of the classical Legionary disappeared. While cavalry did not immediately replace infantry, it certainly started the ball rolling. The Empire in the east always had a higher proportion of cavalry than the west because of the need to combat the Persians and their numerically superior cavalry armies. After the fall of the west, the only enemies on a par with the Romans were the Persians and later the Arabs. Think of it as an arms race, if you will, with both sides pouring more resources into their cavalry.

[DC53]

How did they lose at Adrianople? Was a pure infantry force just destroyed? And by Legionaries, do you mean like decked out in Lorica Segmentata and gladii?

[Gnostiko]

To cut a long story short, because the Roman cavalry fled, leaving the infantry at the mercy of the Goths and their cavalry. I meant more in terms of organisation, training, and tactics. Lorca segmentata had already been replaced by Lorca Hamada (chainmail) and gladii by the longer spatha.

[DC53]

What type of sword do I see the Byzzies using then? Is it a spatha in-game? Also, I thought chain-mail came before Segmentata?

[Vissewalde rex de Gerzika]

What type of sword do I see the Byzzies using then? Is it a spatha in-game? Also, I thought chain-mail came before Segmentata?

They went back to the chainmal because it was not so hard to manufacture and was cheaper(i think), you can read loads on this subject at rome 2 general discussion section btw.

Edit: 13 pages or armor discussion. Trough most of it goes towards the early roman empire there must be something about the latter periods too http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=548275

[Gnostiko]

Baltic Warrior got the hole in one: Lorica segmentata was comparatively more expensive and time consuming to produce than chainmail.

The medieval Romans used two kinds of swords: the spathaion, a long, double-edged straight sword comparative to others in neighbouring cultures, and the paramerion, a single-edged cavalry sabre.

[DC53]

So Segmentata was better, but more expensive. Was the spathaion the same as a spatha? And how come I don't see the paramerion in-game?

[Gnostiko]

'Better' is a little ambiguous; chainmail is cheaper and easier to produce, meaning it doesn't require blacksmiths with that particular expertise, hauberks can be churned out faster, and the difference in cost can be used to buy more armour, hire more soldiers, or bribe some barbarians. In a tactical situation, yes, segmentata offers direct, stronger protection for the individual soldier, but it does not cover the arms, and is quite uncomfortable to wear and difficult to maintain.

You don't see the paramerion purely for coding reasons: Roman cavalry frequently carried both types of sword, but this is impossible to replicate in-game. The decision to use the spathion as a model was entirely down to CBUR's aesthetic preferences.

[DC53]

So Segmentata was better, but more expensive. Was the spathaion the same as a spatha? And how come I don't see the paramerion in-game?

[DC53]

Sorry for the double post. I have another question, if you don't mind. Mercenaries were a large part of Byzantine armies, correct? If so, were they mainly horse-archers? Or were there other types used?

[Gnostiko]

Depends on the era you're talking about: generally speaking, from Constantine I - Heraclius, mercenary numbers pretty much followed the model of late Roman armies, about 1 third mercenary to 2 thirds native. From Heraclius - Basil II 'mercenaries' were more in the form of allied detachments. The army of that era was definitively native. In the short period between Basil II to Alexios I, mercenary recruitment rose. From Alexios to Isaac II, numbers again return to the late Roman model. From the sack of Constantinople onwards, mercenaries became the majority in the army.

Mercenary 'troop types' were as many and varied as you can think of: Hunnish horse archers, Germanic infantry, Slavic light infantry, Varangian axemen, Frankish knights, Italian crossbowmen....the list is pretty inexhaustive. During the Komnenian era, the most common mercenary types were: Frankish/Norman/German heavy cavalry, Italian marines and crossbowmen, Turkish horse archers, Pecheneg horse archers, Alan lancers and horse archers, Serbian infantry and cavalry, Armenian infantry and cavalry, and of course, the Varangian Guard.

[DC53]

So were there any real "native" troops near the end? Were there mercenary Klivanophoroi? And, as an add-on, did any other countries use a soldier like the Kilivanophoroi?