Faction: Byzantines

[Lion.Kanzen]

@wackyserious there are svg files.

chiro.svg

Edited April 29, 2018 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

In the Roman Empire the emblem of the armed forces was a thunderbolt, the arms of Zeus/Jupiter and heaven. In the christian Empire of Constantine the emblem of the armed forces became the cypher of Christ consisting of the letters chi and rho of the greek alphabet, XP (χρ). This cypher was placed on the labarum or imperial banner but also on the shields of the christian army. The emblem of the army staff itself consisted of this cypher on a clipeus, supported by two angels, symbolizing the heavenly mandate. In the achievements of the lower divisions of the army the cypher was supported by heraldic beasts like peacocks or griffins.

As far as we know the emblems of rank within the armed forces did not change and consisted of a gorgoneion, an eagle, a griffin and a lion for the four highest ranks.

This system was not abandoned when the Roman Empire was divided into a Western and an Eastern part. In both parts it continued to exist even after the fall of the Western Empire. In the West it was adopted by the successor states like, for example the empires of the Franks and the Visigoths (and probably the Vandals). In the East a major reform took place when the defense of the empire was organised in themes. In this system the rank of caesar became obsolete and the commanders of a theme apparently had the rank of consul of which the eagle was the emblem. Such eagles were placed on seals, accompanied by a personal cypher or other relevant emblems like a crescent or a crux quadrata. [

Reconstruction of the shield of Constantius II

 

 

Quote

 

Freeze on the southern side of the Column of Arcadius, once Constantinople, 403 AD.

Trinity College, Cambridge (After Grabar, 1971)

In the uppermost register we see some vexillae with a christogram, in the second shield with christograms and in the centre the achievement of the Roman Christian Army Staff.

 

A christogram on a clipeus and supporters makes the achievement of an army organisation, for example of the army staff. When the christogram is supported by angels the organisation is autonomous and has its mandate ‘from heaven’. This is also possible for the army staff of a chief commander as is indicated on the Pile of Arcadius as ilustrated above. In other cases, as illustrated below, the christogram is supported by peacocks which are the emblems of a prefect and this achievement would mean: The prefectural army (-organisation). [9]

 

XP achievement

on the “Tomb of Stilicho”, S. Ambrogio, Milan.

 

An identifiable christogram is on the socalled sarcophagus of Stilicho alias of Valentinian II (375- †392) in the S. Ambrogio in Milan. Here a christogram within a crown is supported by two birds most resembling a male and a female peacock. [11] This matches the clipeus on the same tomb representing Valentinan and his wife.

 

XP achievement

On a tomb in Ravenna

 

However, other supporters were possible like lambs or agnus dei which resulted in an achievement  probably meaning “the army of the believers”. The interpretation of these achievements is not made easier when the crowns are missing.

 

http://www.hubert-herald.nl/Christogram.htm

Quote

The emblem of the early Byzantine Empire was a sun radiant. This was depicted for example at the beginning of the 6th century in Ravenna (ð see illustration in the head of this essay). The achievement of state in that time consisted of this sun radiant supported by two angels (the state considered to be a function of the Empire sanctioned by heaven). Later these emblems were replaced by other ones.
The arms of the Co-emperor himself was green, charged with the XP-cypher. This can be seen on the mosaic in the Church of S. Vitale in Ravenna, depicting Tiberius II Constantine (578-582).     The badge of rank of the Co-emperor was an eagle. It was on a shoulder patch and on the tablion of the chlamys (cloak) of Tiberius II Constantine: Or, and eagle sejant Sable within an annulet Gules. (ill.ð)
The XP-symbol of the army in the East was replaced by a crux quadrata when the stress of the defense force was shifted from the regular imperial army to the Imperial Guard (Scholae). This crux quadrata was on the imperial banner but was also on the shields of Imperial Bodyguard. The Varanger Imperial Bodyguard for example bore shields with a drop-cross, the horizontal bars blue and the vertical bars  red.     Shield of the Scholae (Imperial Bodyguard) . Madrilene Chronicle of John Skylitzes. Palermo, ca. 1150-’75. Bibl. Nacional, Madrid, Vitr. 26-2 fol 28 v°.   This shield is depicted on a scene of the refusal of Michael II (820-829) at his enthronement of the request of the patriarch Nicophorus to reject inconoclasm. Behind the patriarch the bodyguard of Michael with a shield with a cross. John II (1118-’43) is portrayed in the Hagia Sophia with such a cross on his crown. * The shield is almost identical with the shield of William the Conqueror on the Bayeux Tapestry (scene 20).
At about the same time the Imperial banner showed a golden crux-quadrata, the blade red with a blue bordure, the tails red and blue.   Imperial banner Madrilene Chronicle of John Skylitzes. Palermo, ca. 1150-’75. Bibl. Nacional, Madrid,  Vitr. 26-2 fol. 43 r°.   * From the scene when Theophilos arrives at the church of Blachernai. The emperor on horseback, behind him his banner: Red, a golden square cross, a blue bordure, the tails red and blue. On fol. 86 (when Basileus I (867-886) gives Michael III (842-867) back his escaped horse) the banners of the bodyguard are the same but with three or four tails.
At the end of the 12th century the emblem of the army or the Imperial bodyguard seems to have been red, strewn with little golden square crosses potent. Such a shield can be seen on this icon of St. Theodore:   Icon with Saint Theodore Teron. Byzantine, ca. 1200. Tempera and gold on wood. 33 Í 20.5 cm. Inscribed: OC  QEODw O TURON The Holy Monastery of Saint John the Theologian, Patmos, Greece (New Treasury).   On this icon Theodore I Lascaris (*1173-†1222) is portrayed as a warrior and before he became despot (lord) of Nicea in 1204 and emperor in 1208.

http://www.hubert-herald.nl/ByzantiumArms.htm

[wackyserious]

@Lion.Kanzen

Chi Rho and IX Monograms ?

[Lion.Kanzen]

@Alexandermb the spears looks so slim.

Edited April 29, 2018 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

addition to ordinary cataphract types, the Byzantine Empire sometimes fielded a very heavy type of cavalry known as a clibanarius, literally meaning "boiler boy" (pl. clibanarii), but more properly translating into "camp oven bearer", a humorous reference to the fact that men encased in metal armor would almost certainly feel incredibly hot and perspire rapidly, much like an oven. The clibinarii are vaguely attested in Eastern Roman sources, but there is dispute over their actual role and difference from cataphracts in warfare.^{[citation needed]}

The 5th-century Notitia Dignitatum mentions a specialist unit of clibanarii known as the Equites Sagittarii Clibanarii - evidently a unit of heavily armored horse archers based on the heavy cavalry of contemporary Persian armies.

An anonymous 6th-century Roman military treatise also proposed one unusual, experimental unit of scythed chariots with cataphract lancers mounted on the chariot's horses, though there is no evidence that this unit ever materialised.^{[citation needed]}

Nations in the East occasionally fielded cataphracts mounted on camels rather than on horses (the Romans also adopted this practice, calling camel mounted riders dromedarii), with obvious benefits for use in arid regions, as well as the fact that the stench of the camels, if upwind, was a guaranteed way of panicking enemy cavalry units that they came into contact with.^{[citation needed]} Also, camels have greater weight-bearing capability compared to horses enabling heavier armament and armour compared to horse cavalry. The camel's greater height also gives obvious physical and psychological advantages when confronting enemy horsemen. Balanced against this, however, is the relatively greater vulnerability of camel-mounted units to caltrops, due to their softly padded soles on their feet, unlike the hardened hooves of horses. This also meant that camels cannot use horseshoes either. Camels also have much reduced speed and agility compared to horses.

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

 

Quote

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 the theme system, providing the Byzantine Empire with a motivated and professional force that could support its own wartime expenditures. The previously mentioned term Clibanarii (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 as Klibanophoros, which appeared to be a throwback to the super-heavy cavalry of earlier antiquity. These cataphracts specialised in forming a wedge formation and 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 empero

Byzantine cataphracts were a much feared force in their heyday. The army of Emperor Nicephorus II, the 'Pale Death of the Saracens' himself, relied on its cataphracts as its nucleus, coupling cataphract archers with cataphract lancers to create a self-perpetuating 'hammer blow' tactic where the cataphract lancers would charge again and again until the enemy broke, all the while supported by cataphract archers.

 

Edited April 29, 2018 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

 

Byzantine Cataphracts (from Byzantine Armies 886-1118 by Osprey

 

[wackyserious]

@Lion.Kanzen

I just need to add the spec map and will commit it later.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Hero?

[wackyserious]

We have no idea who to include. Maybe the community can discuss it and help us choose whom to include

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, wackyserious said:

We have no idea who to include. Maybe the community can discuss it and help us choose whom to include

Belisarius

[wackyserious]

Maybe someone who's a contemporary of the heroes from the other faction. Or at least from a nearer decade or century.

Anglo-Saxons

• Alfred the Great
• Offa of Merica

Carolingians

• Charlemagne

Norse

• Erik the Red
• Hastein
• Ivar the Boneless

Tagging @Nescio for advice or suggestions.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, wackyserious said:

Maybe someone who's a contemporary of the heroes from the other faction. Or at least from a nearer decade or century.

Anglo-Saxons

• Alfred the Great
• Offa of Merica

Carolingians

• Charlemagne

Norse

• Erik the Red
• Hastein
• Ivar the Boneless

Tagging @Nescio for advice or suggestions.

Add https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Martel 

He destroy the Moorish in France.

[Nescio]

16 minutes ago, wackyserious said:

Maybe someone who's a contemporary of the heroes from the other faction. Or at least from a nearer decade or century.

Anglo-Saxons

• Alfred the Great
• Offa of Merica

Carolingians

• Charlemagne

Norse

• Erik the Red
• Hastein
• Ivar the Boneless

Tagging @Nescio for advice or suggestions.

From those names it seems you're focusing on c. 800 A.D., which is sensible. I'd strongly recommend to include Saint Boniface as a Carolingian hero. Charles Martel and Pepin the Short are also worth considering.

As for the Byzantines, the Justinian dynasty (6th C) is probably too early and has more in common with late antiquity than high middle ages, so I don't think Belisarius, Justinian, and Theodora are suitable. Personally I would recommend the Macedonian dynasty (867–1056), under which the Byzantines peaked, although it's a century later than the Carolingians. They have many potential hero candidates, just look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors#Macedonian_dynasty_(867–1056) for a start.

[wackyserious]

A century up or before the timeframe can be considered. A cohesive relation between the factions/heroes would be great. Like how the Carolingians fought the Umayyads, the Norse raided the Umayyads, and the Anglo-Saxons also struggling with the Norse, just like the Franks and Umayyads.

[Lion.Kanzen]

28 minutes ago, Nescio said:

 

As for the Byzantines, the Justinian dynasty (6th C) is probably too early and has more in common with late antiquity than high middle ages, so I don't think Belisarius, Justinian, and Theodora are suitable. Personally I would recommend the Macedonian dynasty (867–1056), under which the Byzantines peaked, although it's a century later than the Carolingians. They have many potential hero candidates, just look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_emperors#Macedonian_dynasty_(867–1056) for a start.

The golden age of Byzantines... my god, lol. 

Lol.

[Lion.Kanzen]

So first part is from  700-1000 (?) so not Avars or Persian Sassanids ?

[Nescio]

14 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

The golden age of Byzantines... my god, lol. 

Greatest territorial extent does not say everything.

5 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

So first part is from  700-1000 (?) so not Avars or Persian Sassanids ?

Sasanians are probably early, but Avars were still important in the 9th C:

The Abbasids splintered into many factions during the 9th C:

[wackyserious]

@Lion.Kanzen They will be included.

The current state of the mod depicts that it somewhat highlights the Viking Age. Just like how the Romans and Carthaginians are clustered together in the game to clash each other. Likewise with the Spartans, the Athenians and the Persians and lastly, the Successor states. It just a matter of coming up with something that is cohesive.

[Nescio]

8 minutes ago, wackyserious said:

The current state of the mod depicts that it somewhat highlights the Viking Age. Just like how the Romans and Carthaginians are clustered together in the game to clash each other. Likewise with the Spartans, the Athenians and the Persians and lastly, the Successor states. It just a matter of coming up with something that is cohesive.

You probably should consider including the Rus', Khazars, the First Bulgarian Empire, and Great Moravia then.

[wackyserious]

Which among the three is most significant with relevance to the current factions? Might include them after working with the Umayyads.

[asterix]

14 minutes ago, Nescio said:

You probably should consider including the Rus', Khazars, the First Bulgarian Empire, and Great Moravia then.

Great Moravia yeah I am in it, because that was, where I live, I can definitely find smth about it if you would like later on.

[Nescio]

12 minutes ago, wackyserious said:

Which among the three is most significant with relevance to the current factions? Might include them after working with the Umayyads.

Moravia (c. 833–907) was probably the least significant; it interacted both with the Byzantines and the Franks/Germans though.

The Khazar Khaganate (c. 650–969) was a Byzantine ally and trading partner, although there was some tension on the Crimea; it adopted Judaism to be able to trade with both Christian and Muslim states.

The Bulgarian Empire (c. 681–1018) was the great rival of the Byzantine Empire during this period; they competed with each other for control of the Balkans; the Bulgarian Empire came quite close to taking over the Byzantine Empire, but eventually the Byzantines prevailed and gradually conquered them.

The Rus' were Swedes who invaded and settled a vast area between the Baltic and Black Seas, parts of which were later known as Ruthenia or Russia (named after Rurik, founder of the Rus'). Their capital was Kiev. The Rus' launched a raid on Constantinople once but eventually became Byzantine allies and trading partners, converted to Eastern Orthodoxy, assisted in defeating the Bulgarian Empire, and supplied the Byzantines with the first Varangian Guard.

[Alexandermb]

Here are the 5 houses variants (Yes 5  )

Spoiler

Spoiler