Cataphract

Acataphractwas a form ofarmoredheavy cavalrythat originated inPersiaand was fielded inancient warfarethroughoutEurasiaandNorthern Africa.

Historical reenactmentof aSasanian-eracataphract, complete with a full set ofscale armorfor the horse. The rider is covered by extensivemail armour.

Historically, the cataphract was a very heavily armored horseman, with both the rider and mount almost completely covered inScale armororLamellar armouroverchain mailwith, and typically wielding akontos(lance) as his primary weapon.

Cataphracts served as the elite cavalry force for most empires and nations that fielded them, primarily used forchargesto break through opposing heavy cavalry andinfantryformations. Chronicled by many historians from the earliest days ofantiquityup until theHigh Middle Ages,they may have influenced the later Europeanknights,through contact with theEastern Roman Empire.

Peoples and states deploying cataphracts at some point in their history included: theScythians,Sarmatians,Alans,Parthians,Achaemenids,Sakas,Armenians,Seleucids,Attalid,Pontus,Greco-Bactrian,Sassanids,Romans,Goths,Byzantines,Georgians,Chinese,Koreans,Jurchens,Mongols,TangutsandSonghai.

In Europe, the fashion for heavily armoredRoman cavalryseems to have been a response to the Eastern campaigns of the Parthians and Sasanians inAnatolia,as well as numerous defeats at the hands of Iranian cataphracts across the steppes of Eurasia, most notably in theBattle of Carrhae(53 BC) in upperMesopotamia.Traditionally, Roman cavalry was neither heavily-armored nor decisive in effect; the Romanequitescorps comprised mainly lightly-armored horsemen bearing spears and swords and usinglight cavalrytactics toskirmishbefore and during battles, and then to pursue retreating enemies after a victory. The adoption of cataphract-like cavalry formations took hold among thelate Roman armyduring the late 3rd and 4th centuries. The EmperorGallienus(r. 253–268 AD) and his general and putativeusurperAureolus(died 268) arguably contributed much to the institution of Roman cataphract contingents in theLate Roman army.

Etymology

Close combat between soldiers in cataphract.Orlat plaques,1st century BCE.

Saka/Kangjucataphract armour with neck-guard. 1st century BCE.Khalchayan.Museum of Arts of Uzbekistan,nb 40.

The origin of the word is Greek.Κατάφρακτος(kataphraktos,cataphraktos,cataphractos,orkatafraktos) is composed of the Greek root words,κατά,a preposition, andφρακτός( "covered, protected" ), which is interpreted along the lines of "fully armored" or "closed from all sides". The term first appears substantively inLatin,in the writings ofLucius Cornelius Sisenna:"loricatos, quos cataphractos vocant",meaning" the armored, whom they call cataphract ".

There appears to be some confusion about the term in thelate Roman period,as armored cavalrymen of any sort that were traditionally referred to asEquitesin theRepublican periodlater became exclusively designated as "cataphracts".Vegetius,writing in the fourth century, described armor of any sort as "cataphracts" – which at the time of writing would have been eitherlorica segmentataorlorica hamata.Ammianus Marcellinus,Roman soldier and historian of the fourth century, mentions the "cataphracti equites (quos clibanarios dictitant)"– the" cataphract cavalry which they regularly callclibanarii"(implying that clibanarii is a foreign term, not used inClassical Latin).

Clibanariiis a Latin word for "mail-clad riders", itself a derivative of the Greekκλιβανοφόροι(klibanophoroi), meaning "camp oven bearers" from the Greek wordκλίβανος,meaning "camp oven" or "metallic furnace"; the word has also been tentatively linked to thePersianword for a warrior,grivpan.However, it appears with more frequency in Latin sources than in Greek throughout antiquity. A twofold origin of the Greek term has been proposed: either that it was a humorous reference to the heavily armored cataphracts as men encased in armor who would heat up very quickly much like in an oven; or that it was further derived from theOld Persianword*griwbanar(or*grivpanvar), itself composed of theIranianrootsgriva-pana-bara,which translates into "neck-guard wearer".

Roman chroniclers and historiansArrian,AelianandAsclepiodotususe the term "cataphract" in their military treatises to describe any type of cavalry with either partial or full horse and rider armor. TheByzantinehistorianLeo Diaconiscalls themπανσιδήρους ἱππότας(pansidearoos ippotas), which would translate as "fully iron-clad knights".

There is, therefore, some doubt as to what exactly cataphracts were in late antiquity, and whether or not they were distinct fromclibanarii.Some historians theorise that cataphracts andclibanariiwere one and the same type of cavalry, designated differently simply as a result of their divided geographical locations and local linguistic preferences. Cataphract-like cavalry under the command of theWestern Roman Empire,where Latin was the official tongue, always bore theLatinizedvariant of the original Greek name,cataphractarii.The cataphract-like cavalry stationed in theEastern Roman Empirehad no exclusive term ascribed to them, with both the Latin variant and the Greek innovationclibanariibeing used in historical sources, largely because of theByzantines' heavy Greek influence (especially after the 7th century, when Latin ceased to be the official language). Contemporary sources, however, sometimes imply thatclibanariiwere in fact a heavier type of cavalryman, or formed special-purpose units (such as the lateEquitesSagittariiClibanarii,a Roman equivalent ofhorse archers,first mentioned in theNotitia Dignitatum). Given that "cataphract" was used for more than a millennium by various cultures, it appears that different types of fully armored cavalry in the armies of different nations were assigned this name by Greek and Roman scholars not familiar with the native terms for such cavalry.

Iranian origins

The spread of Iranic peoples in Eurasia during the Iron Age highlighted in green.

Sculpture of a Sasanian cataphract inTaq-e Bostan,Iran, 4th century CE.

The reliance on cavalry as a means of warfare in general lies with the ancient inhabitants of theCentral Asiansteppesinearly antiquity,who were one of the first peoples todomesticate the horseand pioneered the development of thechariot.Most of these nomadic tribes and wandering pastoralistsc. 2000 BCwere largelyBronze-Age,Iranianpopulations who migrated from the steppes of Central Asia into theIranian PlateauandGreater Iranfrom around 1000 BC to 800 BC. Two of these tribes are attested based upon archaeological evidence: theMitanniand theKassites.Although evidence is scant, they are believed to have raised and bred horses for specific purposes, as is evidenced by the large archaeological record of their use of the chariot and several treatises on the training of chariot horses.The one founding prerequisite towards the development of cataphract cavalry in theAncient Near East,apart from advancedmetalworkingtechniques and the necessary grazing pastures for raising horses, was the development ofselective breedingandanimal husbandry.Cataphract cavalry needed immensely strong and endurant horses, and without selectively breeding horses for muscular strength and hardiness, they would have surely not been able to bear the immense loads of armor and a rider during the strain of battle.TheNear Eastis generally believed to have been the focal point for where this first occurred.

The previously mentioned earlyIndo-Iraniankingdoms and statehoods were to a large degree the ancestors of the north-eastern Iranian tribes and theMedians,who would found thefirst Iranian Empirein 625 BC. It was the Median Empire that left the first written proof of horse breeding around the 7th century BC, being the first to propagate a specifichorse breed,known as theNisean,which originated in theZagros Mountainsfor use as heavy cavalry.The Nisean would become renowned in the Ancient World and particularly inAncient Persiaas the mount of nobility. These warhorses, sometimes referred to as "Nisean chargers",were highly sought after by theGreeks,and are believed to have influenced many modern horse breeds. With the growing aggressiveness of cavalry in warfare, protection of the rider and the horse became paramount. This was especially true of peoples who treated cavalry as the basic arm of their military, such as theAncient Persians,including the Medes and the successivePersian dynasties.To a larger extent, the same can be said of all theAncient Iranian peoples:second only to perhaps the bow, horses were held in reverence and importance in these societies as their preferred and mastered medium of warfare, due to an intrinsic link throughout history with the domestication and evolution of the horse.

These early riding traditions, which were strongly tied to the rulingcasteof nobility (as only those of noble birth or caste could become cavalry warriors), now spread throughout theEurasian steppesandIranian plateaufrom around 600 BC and onwards due to contact with theMedian Empire's vast expanse across Central Asia, which was the native homeland of the early, north-eastern Iranian ethnic groups such as theMassagetae,Scythians,Sakas,andDahae.The successive Persian Empires that followed the Medes after their downfall in 550 BC took these already long-standing military tactics and horse-breeding traditions and infused their centuries of experience and veterancy from conflicts against theGreek city-states,Babylonians,Assyrians,Scythians, andNorth Arabiantribes with the significant role cavalry played not only in warfare but everyday life to form a military reliant almost entirely upon armored horses for battle.

Spread to Central Asia and the Near East

Chanfron,Northern Yan

The evolution of the heavily armored horseman was not isolated to one focal point during a specific era (such as theIranian plateau), but rather developed simultaneously in different parts ofCentral Asia(especially among the peoples inhabiting theSilk Road) as well as withinGreater Iran.Assyriaand theKhwarezmregion were also significant to the development of cataphract-like cavalry during the 1st millennium BC. Reliefs discovered in the ancient ruins ofNimrud(the ancient Assyrian city founded by kingShalmaneser Iduring the 13th century BC) are the earliest known depictions of riders wearingplated-mail shirtscomposed of metal scales, presumably deployed to provide the Assyrians with a tactical advantage over the unprotectedmounted archersof their nomadic enemies, primarily theAramaeans,Mushki,North Arabian tribesand theBabylonians.TheTiglath-Pileser III(745–727 BC) period, under which theNeo-Assyrian Empirewas formed and reached its military peak, is believed to have been the first context within which the Assyrian kingdom formed crude regiments of cataphract-like cavalry. Even when armed only withpikes,these early horsemen were effective mounted cavalrymen, but when provided with bows underSennacherib(705–681 BC), they eventually became capable both of long-range and hand-to-hand combat, mirroring the development of dual-purpose cataphract archers by the Parthian Empire during the 1st century BC.

Archaeological excavations also indicate that, by the 6th century BC, similar experimentation had taken place among theIranian peoplesinhabiting theKhwarezmregion andAral Seabasin, such as theMassagetae,Dahaeand Saka. While the offensive weapons of these prototype cataphracts were identical to those of the Assyrians, they differed in that not only the rider but also the head and flanks of the horse were protected by armor. Whether this development was influenced by the Assyrians, as Rubin postulates,or perhaps the Achaemenid Empire, or whether they occurred spontaneously and entirely unrelated to the advances in heavily armored cavalry made in the Ancient Near East, cannot be discerned by the archaeological records left by these mounted nomads.

The further evolution of these early forms of heavy cavalry in Western Eurasia is not entirely clear. Heavily armored riders on large horses appear in 4th century BC frescoes in the northernBlack Searegion, notably at a time when the Scythians, who relied on light horse archers, were superseded by the Sarmatians.By the 3rd century BC, light cavalry units were used in most eastern armies, but still only "relatively few states in the East or West attempted to imitate the Assyrian and Chorasmian experiments with mailed cavalry".

Hellenistic and Roman adoption

A stone-etched relief depicting a Parthian cataphract fighting against a lion. Housed in theBritish Museum.

TheGreeksfirst encountered cataphracts during theGreco-Persian Warsof the 5th century BC with the Achaemenid Empire. TheIonian Revolt,an uprising against Persian rule in Asia Minor which preluded theFirst Persian invasion of Greece,is very likely the first Western encounter of cataphract cavalry, and to a degree heavy cavalry in general. The cataphract was widely adopted by theSeleucid Empire,the Hellenistic successors ofAlexander the Great's kingdom who reigned over conquered Persia and Asia Minor after his death in 323 BC. The Parthians, who wrested control over their native Persia from the lastSeleucidKingdom in the East in 147 BC, were also noted for their reliance upon cataphracts as well as horse archers in battle.

Besides the Seleucids it is possible that also theKingdom of Pergamonadopted some cataphracts. Pergamese reliefs show cavalry similarly armed and equipped as Seleucid cataphracts, indicating an adoption. Yet these were probably equipped from trophies taken from the Seleucids,which would suggest limited numbers.

The Romans came to know cataphracts during their frequent wars in theHellenistic East.Cataphracts had varying levels of success against Roman military tactics more so at the Battle of Carrhae and less so atthe battleofLuculluswithTigranes the GreatnearTigranocertain 69 BC.In 38 BC, the Roman generalPublius Ventidius Bassus,by making extensive use ofslingers,whose long-range weapons proved very effective, defeated the uphill-storming Parthian armored cavalry.

At the time ofAugustus,the Greek geographerStraboconsidered cataphracts with horse armor to be typical ofArmenian,Caucasian Albanian,andPersianarmies, but, according toPlutarch,they were still held in rather low esteem in theHellenistic worlddue to their poor tactical abilities against disciplined infantry as well as against more mobile, light cavalry.However, the lingering period of exposure to cataphracts at the eastern frontier as well as the growing military pressure of theSarmatianlancerson theDanubefrontier led to a gradual integration of cataphracts into the Roman army.Thus, although cavalrymen with armor were deployed in theRoman armyas early as the 2nd century BC (Polybios,VI, 25, 3),the first recorded deployment and use of cataphracts (equites cataphractarii) by the Roman Empire comes in the 2nd century AD, during the reign of EmperorHadrian(117–138 AD), who created the first, regular unit of auxiliary, mailed cavalry called theala I Gallorum et Pannoniorum catafractata.A key architect in the process was evidently the Roman emperorGallienus,who created a highly mobile force in response to the multiple threats along the northern and eastern frontier.However, as late as 272 AD,Aurelian's army, completely composed of light cavalry, defeatedZenobiaat theBattle of Immae,proving the continuing importance of mobility on the battlefield.

The Romans fought a prolonged and indecisive campaign in the East against the Parthians beginning in 53 BC, commencing with the defeat ofMarcus Licinius Crassus(close benefactor ofJulius Caesar) and his 35,000legionariesat Carrhae. This initially unexpected and humiliating defeat for Rome was followed by numerous campaigns over the next two centuries entailing many notable engagements such as: theBattle of Cilician Gates,Mount Gindarus,Mark Antony's Parthian Campaignand finally culminating in the bloodyBattle of Nisibisin 217 AD, which resulted in a slight Parthian victory, andEmperor Macrinusbeing forced to concede peace with Parthia.As a result of this lingering period of exposure to cataphracts, by the 4th century, the Roman Empire had adopted a number ofvexillationsof mercenary cataphract cavalry (see theNotitia Dignitatum), such as theSarmatianAuxiliaries.The Romans deployed both native and mercenary units of cataphracts throughout the Empire, from Asia Minor all the way to Britain, where a contingent of 5,500 Sarmatians (including cataphracts, infantry, and non-combatants) were posted in the 2nd century by EmperorMarcus Aurelius(seeEnd of Roman rule in Britain).

This tradition was later paralleled by the rise offeudalismin Christian Europe in theEarly Middle Agesand the establishment of theknighthoodparticularly during theCrusades,while theEastern Romanscontinued to maintain a very active corps of cataphracts long after theirWestern counterparts fellin 476 AD.

Appearance and equipment

Three examples of the various styles of interweaving and wire threading that were commonly employed in the creation of cataphract scale armor to form a stiffened, "armored shell" with which to protect the horse.

Breakdown of a fully armoured Chinese cataphract

But no sooner had the first light of day appeared, than the glittering coats of mail, girt with bands of steel, and the gleaming cuirasses, seen from afar, showed that the king's forces were at hand.

— Ammianus Marcellinus,lateRomanhistorian and soldier, describing the sight ofPersiancataphracts approachingRoman infantryin Asia Minor, circa fourth century.

Cataphracts were almost universally clad in some form of scale armor (Greek:φολιδωτόςFolidotos,equivalent to the RomanLorica squamata) that was flexible enough to give the rider and horse a good degree of motion, but strong enough to resist the immense impact of a thunderous charge into infantry formations. Scale armor was made from overlapping, rounded plates of bronze or iron (most being around one to two millimeters thick), which had two or four holes drilled into the sides, to be threaded with a bronze wire that was then sewn onto an undergarment of leather or animalhide,worn by the horse. A full set of cataphract armor consisted of approximately 1,300 or so "scales" and could weigh an astonishing 40 kilograms or 88 pounds (not inclusive of the rider's body weight). Less commonly,plated mailorlamellar armor(which is similar in appearance but divergent in design, as it has no backing) was substituted for scale armor, while for the most part the rider worechain mail.Specifically, the horse armor was usually sectional (not joined together as a cohesive "suit" ), with large plates of scales tied together around the animal's waist, flank, shoulders, neck and head (especially along thebreastplateof the saddle) independently to give a further degree of movement for the horse and to allow the armor to be affixed to the horse reasonably tightly so that it should not loosen too much during movement. Usually but not always, a close-fitting helmet that covered the head and neck was worn by the rider; the Persian variants extended this even further and encased the wearer's entire head in metal, leaving only minute slits for the nose and eyes as openings. Ammianus Marcellinus, a noted Roman historian and general who served in the army ofConstantius IIinGaulandPersiaand fought against theSassanid armyunderJulian the Apostate,described the sight of a contingent of massed Persian cataphracts in the 4th century:

...all the companies were clad in iron, and all parts of their bodies were covered with thick plates, so fitted that the stiff-joints conformed with those of their limbs; and the forms of human faces were so skillfully fitted to their heads, that since their entire body was covered with metal, arrows that fell upon them could lodge only where they could see a little through tiny openings opposite the pupil of the eye, or where through the tip of their nose they were able to get a little breath. Of these some, who were armed with pikes, stood so motionless that you would think them held fast by clamps of bronze.

The primary weapon of practically all cataphract forces throughout history was the lance. Cataphract lances (known inGreekas aKontos( "oar" ) or inLatinas aContus) appeared much like theHellenistic armies'sarissaeused by the famedGreek phalanxesas an anti-cavalry weapon. They were roughly four meters in length, with a capped point made of iron, bronze, or even animal bone and usually wielded with both hands. Most had a chain attached to the horse's neck and at the end by a fastening attached to the horse's hind leg, which supported the use of the lance by transferring the full momentum of a horse's gallop to the thrust of the charge. Though they lacked stirrups, the traditional Roman saddle had four horns with which to secure the rider;enabling a soldier to stay seated upon the full impact. During the Sassanid era, thePersian militarydeveloped ever more securesaddlesto "fasten" the rider to the horse's body, much like the later knightly saddles of Medieval Europe. These saddles had a cantle at the back of the saddle and two guard clamps that curved across the top of the rider's thighs and fastened to the saddle, thereby enabling the rider to stay properly seated, especially during violent contact in battle.

The penetrating power of the cataphract's lance was recognized as being fearful by Roman writers, described as being capable of transfixing two men at once, as well as inflicting deep and mortal wounds even on opposing cavalries' mounts, and were definitely more potent than the regular one-handed spear used by most other cavalries of the period. Accounts oflater period Middle Eastern cavalrymenwielding them told of occasions when it was capable of bursting through two layers ofchain mail.There are also reliefs in Iran atFiruzabadshowing Persian kings doing battle in a fashion not dissimilar to later depictions of jousts and mounted combat from the Medieval era.

Equestrian relief atFiruzabad,Iranshowing Cataphracts dueling with lances

Cataphracts would often be equipped with an additionalside-armsuch as aswordormace,for use in the melee that often followed a charge. Some wore armor that was primarily frontal: providing protection for a charge and against missiles yet offering relief from the weight and encumbrance of a full suit. In yet another variation, cataphracts in some field armies were not equipped with shields at all, particularly if they had heavy body armor, as having both hands occupied with a shield and lance left no room to effectively steer the horse. Eastern and Persian cataphracts, particularly those of theSassanid Empire,carried bows as well as blunt-force weapons, to soften up enemy formations before an eventual attack, reflecting upon the longstanding Persian tradition ofhorse archeryand its use in battle by successivePersian Empires.

Tactics and deployment

The cataphract-style parade armor of a Saka (Scythian) royal from theIssyk kurgan,dubbed "Golden Man". The overlapping golden scales are typical of cataphract armor.

While they varied in design and appearance, cataphracts were universally the heavy assault force of most nations that deployed them, acting as "shock troops" to deliver the bulk of an offensive manoeuvre, while being supported by various forms of infantry andarchers(bothmountedand unmounted). While their roles in military history often seem to overlap withlancersor generic heavy cavalry, they should not be considered analogous to these forms of cavalry, and instead represent the separate evolution of a very distinct class of heavy cavalry in theNear Eastthat had certain connotations of prestige, nobility, andesprit de corpsattached to them. In many armies, this reflected uponsocial stratificationor acaste system,as only the wealthiest men of noble birth could afford the panoply of the cataphract, not to mention the costs of supporting several war horses and ample amounts of weaponry and armor.

Fire supportwas deemed particularly important for the proper deployment of cataphracts. The Parthian army that defeated the Romans at Carrhae in 53 BC operated primarily as acombined armsteam of cataphracts andhorse archersagainst the Roman heavy infantry. The Parthian horse archers encircled the Roman formation and bombarded it with arrows from all sides, forcing the legionaries to form theTestudo or "tortoise" formationto shield themselves from the huge numbers of incoming arrows. This made them fatally susceptible to a massed cataphract charge, since the testudo made the legionaries immobile and incapable of attacking or defending themselves in close combat against the long reach of the Parthian cataphracts'Kontos,a type oflance.The end result was a far smaller force of Parthian cataphracts and horse archers wiping out a Roman army four times their number, due to a combination offire and movement,which pinned the enemy down, wore them out and left them vulnerable to a deathblow.

Two heavily armored noblemen dueling on horseback withkontos;Sasanian era silver plate with gold coating, Azerbaijan Museum, Tabriz, Iran

The cataphract charge was very effective due to the disciplined riders and the large numbers of horses deployed. As early as the 1st century BC, especially during the expansionist campaigns of the Parthian and Sassanid dynasties, EasternIraniancataphracts employed by theScythians,Sarmatians, Parthians, and Sassanids presented a grievous problem for the traditionally less mobile, infantry-dependent Roman Empire. Roman writers throughout imperial history made much of the terror of facing cataphracts, let alone receiving their charge. Parthian armies repeatedly clashed with the Roman legions in a series of wars, featuring the heavy usage of cataphracts. Although initially successful, the Romans soon developed ways to crush the charges of heavy horsemen, through use of terrain and maintained discipline.

Persiancataphracts were a contiguous division known as theSavaran(Persian:سواران,literally meaning "riders" ) during the era of the Sassanid army and remained a formidable force from the 3rd to 7th centuries until thecollapse of the Sassanid Empire.Initially theSassanid dynastycontinued the cavalry traditions of the Parthians, fielding units of super-heavy cavalry. This gradually fell out of favour, and a "universal" cavalryman was developed during the later 3rd century, able to fight as amounted archeras well as a cataphract. This was perhaps in response to the harassing, nomadic combat style used by the Sassanids' northern neighbours who frequently raided their borders, such as theHuns,Hephthalites,Xiongnu,Scythians, andKushans,all of which favouredhit and run tacticsand relied almost solely upon horse archers for combat. However, as theRoman-Persian warsintensified to the West, sweeping military reforms were again re-established. During the 4th century,Shapur II of Persiaattempted to reinstate the super-heavy cataphracts of previous Persian dynasties to counter the formation of the new, RomanComitatenses,the dedicated, front-line legionaries who were theheavy infantryof the late Roman Empire. The elite of the Persian cataphracts, known as thePushtigban Body Guards,were sourced from the very best of theSavarandivisions and were akin in their deployment and military role to their Roman counterparts, thePraetorian Guard,used exclusively by Roman emperors. Ammianus Marcellinus remarked in his memoirs that members of the Pushtigban were able to impale two Roman soldiers on their spears at once with a single furious charge. Persian cataphract archery also seems to have been again revived inlate antiquity,perhaps as a response (or even a stimulus) to an emerging trend of the late Roman army towards mobility and versatility in their means of warfare.

In an ironic twist, the elite of theEast Roman armyby the 6th century had become the cataphract, modelled after the very force that had fought them in the east for more than 500 years earlier. During theIberianandLazicwars initiated in theCaucasusbyJustinian I,it was noted byProcopiusthat Persian cataphract archers were adept at firing their arrows in very quick succession and saturating enemy positions but with little hitting power, resulting in mostly non-incapacitating limb wounds for the enemy. The Roman cataphracts, on the other hand, released their shots with far more power, able to launch arrows with lethal kinetic energy behind them, albeit at a slower pace.

Later history and usage in the early Middle Ages

A depiction ofSarmatiancataphracts fleeing from Roman cavalry during theDacian warscirca 101 AD, atTrajan's ColumninRome

Some cataphracts fielded by the later Roman Empire were also equipped with heavy, lead-weightdartscalledMartiobarbuli,akin to theplumbataused by late Roman infantry. These were to be hurled at the enemy lines during or just before a charge, to disorder the defensive formation immediately before the impact of the lances. With or without darts, a cataphract charge would usually be supported by some kind of missile troops (mounted or unmounted) placed on either flank of the enemy formation. Some armies formalised this tactic by deploying separate types of cataphract, the conventional, very heavily armored, bowless lancer for the primary charge and a dual purpose, lance-and-bow cataphract for supporting units.

References to Eastern Roman cataphracts seemed to have disappeared in the late 6th century, as the manual of war known asStrategikon of Maurice,published during the same period, made no mention of cataphracts or their tactical employment.This absence persisted through most of the Thematic period, until the cataphracts reappeared in EmperorLeo VI'sSylloge Taktikon,probably reflecting a revival that paralleled the transformation of the Eastern Roman army from a largely defensive force into a largely offensive force. The cataphracts deployed by the Eastern Roman Empire (most noticeably after the 7th century, whenLate Latinceased to be the official language of the empire) were exclusively referred to asKataphraktoi,due to the Empire's strong Greek influence, as opposed to theRomanizedtermCataphractarii,which subsequently fell out of use.

These later Roman cataphracts were a much feared force in their heyday. The army of Emperor Nikephoros II Phokas reconstituted Kataphraktoi during the tenth century and included a complex and highly developed composition of an offensive, blunt-nosed wedge formation. Made up of roughly five hundred cavalrymen, this unit was clearly designed with a single decisive charge in mind as the centre of the unit was composed of mounted archers. These would release volleys of arrows into the enemy as the unit advanced at a trot, with the first four rows of mace-armed Kataphraktoi then penetrating the enemy formation through the resulting disruption (contrary to popular representations, Byzantine Kataphraktoi did not charge, they advanced at a steady medium-pace trot and were designed to roll over an enemy already softened by the archers).

This formation is the only method prescribed for Kataphraktoi in the Praecepta Militaria of Emperor Nikephoros which was designed as a decisive hammer-blow which would break the enemy. Due to the rigidity of the formation, it was not possible for it to re-form and execute a second charge in instances where the first blow did not smash the enemy (no feigned flight or repeated charges were possible due to the formation employed). It is for this reason that Byzantine military manuals (Praecepta Militaria and the Taktika) advise where possible, for the use of a second wedge of Kataphraktoi which could be hurled at the enemy in the event that they resisted the initial charge.

Contemporary depictions, however, imply that Byzantine cataphracts were not as completely armored as the earlier Roman and Sassanid incarnation. The horse armor was noticeably lighter than earlier examples, being made of leather scales or quilted cloth rather than metal at all. Byzantine cataphracts of the 10th century were drawn from the ranks of the middle-class landowners through thethemesystem, providing the Byzantine Empire with a motivated and professional force that could support its own wartime expenditures. The previously mentioned termClibanarii(possibly representing a distinct class of cavalry from the cataphract) was brought to the fore in the 10th and 11th centuries of the Byzantine Empire, known in Byzantine Greek asKlibanophoros,which appeared to be a throwback to the super-heavy cavalry of earlier antiquity. These cataphracts specialised in forming awedge formationand penetrating enemy formations to create gaps, enabling lighter troops to make a breakthrough. Alternatively, they were used to target the head of the enemy force, typically a foreign emperor.

As with the original cataphracts, the Leonian/Nikephorian units seemed to have fallen out of favour and use with their handlers, making their last, recorded appearance in battle in 970 and the last record of their existence in 1001, referred to as being posted to garrison duty. If they had indeed disappeared, then it is possible that they were revived once again during theKomnenian restoration,a period of thorough financial, territorial and military reform that changed theByzantine armyof previous ages, which is referred to separately as theKomnenian armyafter the 12th century.EmperorAlexios I Komnenos(1081–1118) established a new military force from the ground up, which was directly responsible for transforming the aging Byzantine Empire from one of theweakest periodsin its existence into a major economic and military power, akin to its existence during the golden age ofJustinian I.However, even in this case, it seems that the cataphract was eventually superseded by other types of heavy cavalry.

It is difficult to determine when exactly the cataphract saw his final day. After all, cataphracts and knights fulfilled a roughly similar role on the medieval battlefield, and the armored knight survived well into theearly modern eraof Europe. The Byzantine army maintained units of heavily armored cavalrymen up until its final years, mostly in the form of Western EuropeanLatinikonmercenaries, while neighbouringBulgars,Serbs,Avars,Alans,Lithuanians,Khazars,and other Eurasian peoples emulated Byzantine military equipment. During medieval times, theDraco bannerandTamgaof Sarmatian cataphracts belonging to the tribe of Royal Sarmatians, was used by theClan of Ostojaand becomeOstoja coat of arms.

As Western European metalwork became increasingly sophisticated, the traditional image of the cataphract's awe-inspiring might and presence quickly evaporated. From the 15th century and onwards,chain mail,lamellar armor,andscale armorseemed to fall out of favour with Eastern noble cavalrymen as elaborate and robust platecuirassesarrived from the West; this, in combination with the advent ofearly firearms,cannon,andgunpowder,rendered the relatively thin and flexible armor of cataphracts obsolete. Despite these advances, the Byzantine army, often unable to afford newer equipmenten masse,was left ill-equipped and forced to rely on its increasingly archaic military technology. The cataphract finally passed into the pages of history with theFall of Constantinopleon 29 May 1453, when the last nation to refer to its cavalrymen as cataphracts fell (seeDecline of the Byzantine Empire).

Cataphracts in East Asia

Main article:Horses in East Asian warfare

A Chineseterracottafigurine of a cataphract horse and rider, created during theNorthern Wei Dynasty(386–534 AD)

A Chinese ceramic figurine of a cataphract horse and rider, from theNorthern Qi(550–577 AD) period

Horses covered with scale armor are alluded to in the ancient Chinese book of poetry, theShi Jingdating between the 7th to 10th centuries BC—however, this armor did not cover the entire horse and was likely made ofhide,not metal as traditionally believed (e.g. byZhu Xi,Séraphin Couvreur,James Legge,etc.).According to surviving records, the Western Han Dynasty had 5,330 sets of horse armor at the Donghai Armory.Comprehensive full-body armor for horses made of organic materials such as rawhide may have existed as early as the Qin Dynasty according to archaeological discoveries of stone lamellar armor for horses. Comprehensive armor for horses made of metal might have been used in China as early as theThree Kingdomsperiod, but the usage wasn't widely adapted as most cavalry formation requires maneuverability. It was not until the early 4th century, however, that cataphracts came into widespread use among with theXianbeitribes ofInner MongoliaandLiaoning,which led to the readoption of cataphracts en masse by Chinese armies during theJin dynasty (266–420)andNorthern and Southern Dynastiesera. Numerous burial seals, military figurines, murals, and official reliefs from this period testify to the great importance of armored cavalry in warfare. The laterSui Empirecontinued the use of cataphracts. During theTang Empireit was illegal for private citizens to possess horse armor.Production of horse armor was controlled by the government.However, the use of cataphracts was mentioned in many records and literature.Cataphracts were also used in warfare from theAnlushan Rebellionto the fall of the Tang Dynasty. During the Five Dynasties and 10 Kingdoms era, cataphracts were important units in this civil war.In the same period, cataphracts were also popular among nomadic empires, such as theLiao,Western Xia,andJindynasties—the heavy cataphracts of the Xia and Jin were especially effective and were known as "Iron Sparrowhawks" and "Iron Pagodas" respectively. TheSong Empirealso developed cataphract units to counter those of the Liao, Xia, and Jin, but the shortage of suitable grazing lands and horse pastures in Song territory made the effective breeding and maintenance of Song cavalry far more difficult. This added to the Song's vulnerability to continual raids by the emergingMongol Empirefor over two decades, which eventually vanquished them in 1279 at the hands ofKublai Khan.TheYuan dynasty,successors to the Song, were a continuation of the Mongol Empire, and seem to have all but forgotten the cataphract traditions of their predecessors. The last remaining traces of cataphracts inEast Asiaseems to have faded with the downfall of the Yuan in 1368 and later heavy cavalry never reached the levels of armor and protection for the horses as these earlier cataphracts.

Other East Asian cultures were also known to have used cataphracts during a similar time period to the Chinese. Meanwhile, theTibetan Empireused cataphracts as the elite assault force of its armies for much of its history.The Gokturk Khaganates might also have had cataphracts, as the Orkhon inscriptions mentionedLatter Göktürkgeneral Kul-Tegin exchanged armored horses in battle.

See also

• Horses in warfare– Use of equines in combat
• Lancer– Type of light or heavy cavalry armed with a lance
• Komnenian army– Period of the Byzantine Empire that created a new army that served from 1081 AD – 1204 ADPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
• Ostoja coat of arms– Polish coat of arms

Sources

• Bivar, A. D. H. (1972), "Cavalry Equipment and Tactics on the Euphrates Frontier",Dumbarton Oaks Papers,26:271–291,doi:10.2307/1291323,JSTOR1291323
• Campbell, Brian (1987), "Teach Yourself How to Be a General",Journal of Roman Studies,77:13–29,doi:10.2307/300572,JSTOR300572,S2CID162374857
• Eadie, John W. (1967), "The Development of Roman Mailed Cavalry",Journal of Roman Studies,57(1/2): 161–173,doi:10.2307/299352,JSTOR299352,S2CID163396768
• Nikonorov, Valerii P. (1985a). "The Parthian Cataphracts".Chetvertaia vsesoiuznaia shkola molodykh vostokovedov.T. I. Moscow. pp. 65–67.
• Smith, William; et al. (1890). "Cataphracti".A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities(3rd ed.).The text of this book is now in the public domain.
• Nikonorov, Valerii P. (1985b). "The Development of Horse Defensive Equipment in the Antique Epoch". In Kruglikova, I. T. (ed.).Zheleznyi vek Kavkaza, Srednei Azii i Sibiri.Moscow: Nauka. pp. 30–35.
• Nikonorov, Valerii P. (1998). "Cataphracti, Catafractarii and Clibanarii: Another Look at the old problem of their Identifications".Voennaia arkheologiia: Oruzhie i voennoe delo v istoricheskoi i sotsial.noi perspektive (Military Archaeology: Weaponry and Warfare in the Historical and Social Perspective).St. Petersburg. pp. 131–138.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Perevalov, S. M. (2002), "The Sarmatian Lance and the Sarmatian Horse-Riding Posture",Anthropology & Archeology of Eurasia,41(4): 7–21,doi:10.2753/aae1061-195940047,S2CID161826066
• Rubin, Berthold (1955), "Die Entstehung der Kataphraktenreiterei im Lichte der chorezmischen Ausgrabungen",Historia,4:264–283
• Soria Molina, D. (2011) "Contarii,cataphractiyclibanarii.La caballería pesada del ejército romano, de Vespasiano a Severo Alejandro ",Aquila Legionis,14, pp. 69–122.
• Soria Molina, D. (2012) "Cataphractiyclibanarii.La caballería pesada del ejército romano, de Severo Alejandro a Justiniano ",Aquila Legionis,15, pp. 117–163.
• Soria Molina, D. (2013) "Cataphractiyclibanarii(y III). La caballería pesada del ejército romano-bizantino, de Justiniano a Alejo Comneno ",Aquila Legionis,16, 75-123.
• Warry, John Gibson (1980).Warfare in the Classical World: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Weapons, Warriors, and Warfare in the Ancient Civilisations of Greece and Rome.New York: St. Martin's Press.
• Macdowall, Simon (1995).Late Roman Cavalryman, 236–565 AD.Osprey Publishing.
• Mielczarek, M. (1993) Cataphracti and Clibanari. Studies on the Heavy Armoured Cavalry of the Ancient World. Lodz: Oficyna Naukowa MS.
• Farrokh, Kaveh (2005).Sassanian Elite Cavalry, AD 224–642.Osprey Publishing.
• Nell, Grant S. (1995).The Savaran: The Original Knights.University of Oklahoma Press.
• Marcellinus, Ammianus.Roman Antiquities, Book XXV.p. 481.
• José J. Vicente Sánchez (1999). Los regimientos de catafractos y clibanarios en la tardo antigüedad.

Antigüedad y cristianismo: Monografías históricas sobre la Antigüedad tardía, Nº 16, pages 397-418.ISSN 0214-7165.

External links

• Cataphracts and Siegecraft—Roman, Parthian and Sasanid military organisation.
• Image of Sarmatian armored horse detail on the Trajan's column projectatMcMaster University
• Third century AD graffito of Parthian Cataphractus
• The historical works of Ammianus Marcellinus