Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Tom McMillan]

In a message dated 5/31/02 1:29:14 PM, WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com writes:

<< We all feel that the best authority we have on Byzantines and how they
should be represented is Paul. I defer to his judgement on these
issues. >>

And may God have mercy on us all........ &)

[Paul Georgian]

--- In WarriorRules@y..., Quahog25@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 5/31/02 1:29:14 PM, WarriorRules@y... writes:
>
> << We all feel that the best authority we have on Byzantines and
how they
> should be represented is Paul. I defer to his judgement on these
> issues. >>
>
> And may God have mercy on us
all........ &)

Not so smart Tom! You're busted! I just joined up and what do I find
but my ol' bud Quahog dissing me when he thinks I won't find out.
Sniff, sniff. :-)

Paul G.

[Bill Low]

Hullo, Paul Byz ... welcome aboard!

At 05:34 AM 6/1/2002 +0000, paulbyzan wrote:
> --- In WarriorRules@y..., Quahog25@a... wrote:
>>
>> In a message dated 5/31/02 1:29:14 PM, WarriorRules@y... writes:
>>
>><< We all feel that the best authority we have on Byzantines and
> how they
>> I defer to his judgement on these
>> >>
>>
>> And may God have mercy on us
> &)
>
> I just joined up and what do I find
>
>
>
> Paul G.
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
-----------------------------------------------------
From Harold William Low

[John Murphy]

Hi Paul G.

Glad to have you on the list.

Would you please take a look at message #4812 which I posted a bit
back regarding the Maurikian Byzantine list in Dark Age Warrior?

You are probably better aware of the following than I am but I'll
include it for everyone else's benefit and so you don't have to thumb
through and find it.

Foederati and Optimates are referred to in the Strategikon as specific
units in an idealized (?) army deployment in Book 3 Sections 6-8
(pages 41 to 43 of the later edition) and also in the discussion of
unit depths in Book 2 Section 6 (pages 28-29). There is a smattering
of other references to them as well throughout. I am not off the cuff
locating the specific passage which ties the three elite units
together into a praesental organization which later became the
opsikion theme, but it is easily found where it has been described as
such in various secondary sources. In any event the types and sizes of
the units mentioned in the cited passages of the Strategikon for these
is at least consistent with that.

The text in these passages certainly also implies a regular
organization for the Optimates which are shown in these passages as
being organized, paid and trained by the state regardless of their
origins (and the presence of a large number of Romans in the Optimates
is attested to in any case in several secondary sources and perhaps in
the Strategikon as well).

One particular passage of the Strategikon, not the only one I believe,
regarding double armament would be the first two paragraphs of Book 1
Section 2 ("Cavalry Armament"). This is on page 12 of the recent
reprint.

A couple of Strategikon passages - and I believe other evidence -
mention lances with leather work permitting them to be carried while
keeping the hand free for handling a bow. This is a powerful arguement
I think for double armament.

In the current list only 2/5 of the line cavalry have bows. First of
all, many more are indicated by the Strategikon as "archers" when
greater than the minimum 5 ranks are used. Secondly, this seems to
dilute the supposed emphasis the Byzantines of this period placed on
mounted archery since less than half of their line troops have bows
and being in open order they are less able to mass firepower.

As a final comment on double vs single armament, the Byzantines and
the heavier of their Persian or even Avar enemies are mentioned in
quite a few places as having similar armament. Yet the Avars get
double-armed heavies and so, in FW, do the Sassanids. Supposedly there
were a lot of cross-influences between these.

Anyway, I like the new list better than anything else out there.
Specific armament is perhaps less vital than the new-found ability of
these troops to function in the kind of roles which the Strategikon
and other sources indicate. Putting it to good effect on the table is
of course always more problematic. Sorry to take entirely too much
space and hope someone gets something meaningful from all this.