Cataphracti, Catafractarii and Clibanarii: Another Look at the Old Problem of ID

[davidb]

https://www.academia.edu/1264318/Cataphracti_Catafractarii_and_Clibanarii_Another_Look_at_the_Old_Problem_of_Their_Identifications

Another article that i thought people might be interested in. (It was a good week in my digest from academia.edu)

David

[Patrick Waterson]

He finds that cataphracti and clibanarii are one and the same, which is fine and supports our earlier conclusions.  He believes cataphractarii to be armoured men on unarmoured horses, but does not consider how he would distinguish them from equites.

[Duncan Head]

Another intriguing study is Zuckerman's Le camp de Sosteos et les catafractarii which finds that in at least one unit in 4th-century Egypt, ala III Assyriorum, catafractarius was a rank, senior to eques and below decurio. Z's interpretation is that there were more cataphracts than we'd think, because some men in "ordinary" regiments wore cataphract equipment.

[Jim Webster]

could catafractarius have been the rank held by a file leader? Heavier armour would have made sense for the man at the front

[Duncan Head]

Interesting suggestion; and I see it is the interpretation of wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turma#Empire

In the late Roman army, the turma and its structure were retained, with changes in titelature only: the turma was still headed by a decurio, who also led the first ten-strong file, while the other two files were led by subaltern catafractarii, in essence the successors of the early Empire's duplicarii and sesquiplicarii

- citing Erdkamp's Companion to the Roman Army.

[Patrick Waterson]

This intriguingly hints at formations with cataphracted troops in front and perhaps less-well-armoured horsemen behind.

If this were the case it could somewhat change our understanding of later Roman cavalry.

[Duncan Head]

Well, Zuckerman certainly does think that the catafractarii replaced the duplicarii and sesquiplicarii, as the wiki quote suggests. And at the end of the article he does note the presence of individual catafractarii in several units in Egypt with non-cataphract titles: as well as ala III Assyriorum there's ala II Herculia, ala I Abasgorum, ala V Praelectorum. So it's not just the one regiment. Unfortunately  that level of evidence tends to be lacking outside of Egyptian papyrus records, so we can't tell if the practice was widespread, just Eastern, or even just Egyptian. Z does also note that these are all frontier units, and suggests that the counterpart to forming all-cataphract units in the field-armies was up-armouring "gradés" - NCOs? - in the old-style alae.

[Jim Webster]

Just thinking about the Ptolemaic Greek cavalry with extra armour to cope with the arrows of their southern neighbours, is there any chance of a connection?

[Duncan Head]

Given that the Roman development was as far as we can see a C4th AD innovation, and the Ptolemaic felt-covered cavalry C3rd BC, I'd say no.

(For those who haven't come across these felt-caparisoned Ptolemaics, http://tabulaenovaeexercituum.pbworks.com/w/page/14246762/Ptolemaic is probably the easiest place to look.)

[Andreas Johansson]

Well, Zuckerman certainly does think that the catafractarii replaced the duplicarii and sesquiplicarii, as the wiki quote suggests. And at the end of the article he does note the presence of individual catafractarii in several units in Egypt with non-cataphract titles: as well as ala III Assyriorum there's ala II Herculia, ala I Abasgorum, ala V Praelectorum. So it's not just the one regiment. Unfortunately  that level of evidence tends to be lacking outside of Egyptian papyrus records, so we can't tell if the practice was widespread, just Eastern, or even just Egyptian. Z does also note that these are all frontier units, and suggests that the counterpart to forming all-cataphract units in the field-armies was up-armouring "gradés" - NCOs? - in the old-style alae.

I haven't read the OP article yet, but if Patrick is right that it leaves unclear how cataphractarii's equipment differed from equites', that would suggest another interpretation -  the NCO's were equipped the same as everyone else and simply got a snazzy trendy title.

Further possibility, essentially retrojecting Maurikian practice - the back ranks might lack even the relatively light armour nominally expected of equites, but the special effort was made to keep the file leaders up to standard, thus making them armoured as against the part- or un-armoured back ranks.

[Tim]

So Duncan, in addition to Phil's Bw(X)/(I) innovation for DBMM Hussites et al, are we now heading toward LIR Kn(X)/Cv(O) only in Egypt in the next DBMM lists...?

(apologies in advance to those not fluent in DBx speak)

[Patrick Waterson]

One difficulty with the idea of cataphractarius/catafractarius as a file leader is that in Ammianus XVI.12 the term is used for a troop type:

"Already the beams of the sun were reddening the sky, and the blare of the trumpets was sounding in unison, when the infantry forces were led out at a moderate pace, and to their flank were joined the squadrons of cavalry, among whom were the cuirassiers [cataphractarii] and the [horse] archers, a formidable branch of the service." - Ammianus XVI.12.7

A few dozen sections later, he does it again:

"Now there fell in this battle on the Roman side two hundred and forty-three soldiers and four high officers: Bainobaudes, tribune of the Cornuti, and also Laipso; and Innocentius, commander of the mailed cavalry [cataphractarios ducens], and one unattached tribune, whose name is not available to me." - idem XVI.12.63

The only other mention of cataphractarii in Ammianus is once again in Julian's Gallic army:

"And to avoid any delay, he took only the cataphractariis and the ballistariis ..." - idem XVI.2.5

These 'cataphractarii' are described as 'clibanarii' in XVI.12.22:

"For they realised that one of their warriors on horseback, no matter how skilful, in meeting one of our clibanario, must hold bridle and shield in one hand and brandish his spear with the other, and would thus be able to do no harm to a soldier hidden in iron armour ..."

So we may be back to just the one heavily armoured cavalry type, conceivably called 'cataphractarii' in the western army and 'cataphracti' in the eastern, or maybe 'cataphracti' is just a useful short version occasionally employed.  If so, I am not sure what to make of Zuckerman's idea about the duplicarius and sesquiplicarius each being replaced by a catafractarius.  There is of course the possibility that, as he suggests, some individuals in ordinary cavalry units were up-armoured, this in addition to the existence of official homogenously armoured cataphractarii/cataphracti/clibanarii units.

[Erpingham]

Just a thought but reference is made to the units mentioned being border troops (limitaneae?).  Maybe their role did not call for the whole unit to be equipped the same?  Cataphracts wouldn't exactly be ideal for patrol and pursuing raiders.

[Duncan Head]

I tend to see clibanarii as a subset of cataphracts, rather than a synonym.

Just a thought but reference is made to the units mentioned being border troops (limitaneae?).  Maybe their role did not call for the whole unit to be equipped the same?  Cataphracts wouldn't exactly be ideal for patrol and pursuing raiders.

That doesn't fit so well with Z's idea of catafractarius being a rank. He reckons that's clear from records of promotions; ordinary troopers get promoted to catafractarius and then from that rank to decurio, and the old "NCO" ranks like duplicarius that previously sat in that position in the hierarchy seem to have disappeared.

[Erpingham]

That doesn't fit so well with Z's idea of catafractarius being a rank. He reckons that's clear from records of promotions; ordinary troopers get promoted to catafractarius and then from that rank to decurio, and the old "NCO" ranks like duplicarius that previously sat in that position in the hierarchy seem to have disappeared.

He knows this stuff better than most, certainly me.  Though a hierarchy in which the unit is split into troopers and cataphracts, there may be a movement through the ranks from trooper to cataphract and it is from that experienced/elite group the officers come.  I also don't see that as a contradiction from fully equipped file leaders and less well equipped rankers Byzantine fashion, as mentioned by Andreas.