[Ben P.]

The title is self explanatory. How effective where the Klibanophori in a charge against the best their enemies could throw at them (Infantry and Cavalry)?

[Sean Manning]

What period and what culture are you talking about? Sassanid Clibanarii/Klibanophoroi? Roman Clibanarii/Klibanophoroi?

In general, ancient heavy cavalry could do just about what their medieval and early modern equivalents could. Cataphracts and clibanarii had the mixed blessing of being the best armoured troops on the field, so they were very hard to kill but tired and overheated quickly.

[Joel Minturn]

Apparently the term Klibanophoroi means something like "camp oven carrier"

and if this site is to be belived http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=224680 then the Klibanophoroi would not be very useful in a fight at all being that they are armour bearers (looks like the suffix phoroi means "berarer" not "wearer" hence the translation of "camp oven bearer" not "camp oven wearer")

I'll be the first to admit that ancient greek language (or what ever language that is) is not something I know anything about so I'm making no claims about the above being correct just reporting what I found. is a convincing argument though.

[Ben P.]

@ Sean Klibanophoroi as in the Byzantine Cataphract although I'm curious about Sassanins and how they fared. Can you give me any battles?

[Michael G.]

The Byzantine klibanophoroi seem to have had a pretty short lifespan. They were probably introduced by Nikephoros Phokas (r. 963-969) and gone by 100 years later or so. John Haldon in Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World, 565-1204 believes they may have vanished during the reign of Constantine X (1059-67) (p.223). Ian Heath in Byzantine Armies 886-1118 states that it is likely that they disappeared after the battle of Manzikert in 1071 (p.36). So this gives a pretty small window to look for specific battles. Unless you are including all Byzantine armored cavalry (i.e. kataphraktoi), which date all the way back to the beginning of the Byzantine Empire, whenever you choose to define that.

I don't have much info on specific battles, but Haldon states in Byzantium at War: AD 600-1453 that, "Contemporary writers, both Byzantine and Arab, comment on the effects of this formation [the klibanophoroi wedge] on their foes" (p. 49). In his Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World, 565-1204, Haldon mentions the battle of Troina in 1040, in which the, "Roman charge...demolished the Arab battle line at the first attack," but he says that it is unclear whether the cavalry involved are klibanophoroi (p.223).

Regarding the idea that klibanophoroi were simply armor bearers for the heavy cavalry, I have not seen Paul Magdalino's work making this claim, so I can't assess his evidence, but it seems odd to me. There were cavalry under Alexander the Great known as sarissophoroi, and I'm not sure anyone has claimed that they merely carried the sarissas for other soldiers. Indeed, they seem to have been in combat quite frequently. In any case, the conventional wisdom has been that kataphraktoi were the general Byzantine armored cavalry, and the klibanophoroi were the special, extra-heavily armored cavalry introduced by Nikephoros Phokas. But I would add that the distinction between the various versions of the terms clibanarius and cataphractus is not entirely clear, and could have varied over time and location.

[Sean Manning]

The -phoroi, “-bearing” suffix was used by the ancient Greeks to mean “troops armed with” eg. doruphoroi “spearbearers, spearmen, bodyguards” or gerrophoroi "troops with wicker shields". The name "klibanophoroi" may come from a Persian word for gorgets, or may be soldiers' slang comparing the riders to ovens. Medieval writers would probably try to immitate the classical terminology.

[Ben P.]

Yes the heavy ones formed by Nikephoros Phokas

[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Sean Manning]

Yes, Sassanid cataphracts were fully armoured men on armoured horses who used bows as their main weapons. But Parthian cataphracts were mostly lancers, as were Greek and Roman cataphracts as far as I know. I don't know how Achaemenid and other early cataphracts were armed.

Ben, I don't know much about the Byzantine army under Nikephoros Phokas, so I can't answer your question.

[Ben P.]

Klibanophoroi used both bow, lance, and marziobarbouloi IIRC the sassanins were also pretty good with a lance as well it seems to be pretty common that cataphracts used both bow and lance

BTW Klibanophoroi horses were armoured on all sides while it usually oxehide it could also be horn or metal

[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Gary Teuscher]

From what I have read, the byzantine cataphracts, as opposed to the heavier Klibanophoroi, were a combination of archers and lancers, IIRC Lancers in ranks 1, 2, & 5, Bows in ranks 3-4. This is probably based on just one of the many treatises though. IIRC armoured horses was a desire for the Cataphracts, but not as common in practice.

The Klibanophori had more complete armour, mailed hoods being common (reminds me of the Persian Immortal foot a bit), fully armoured horses. I think weighted darts are mentioned as well.

This is in theory how they should be equipped, the state of the Byzantine economy and how much was going toward the military probably had much to do with actual armnament. The Themata likely varied more in equipment, being less well equipped in general.

The top paragraph probably holds more true for the early Byzantine period. By thye late 10th century, much of the Tagmata was various foreign mercenaries or if you want to call them foreign regulars, with Tagmatic horse units of Turks and Western troops not being uncommon.

My guess is these later "foreign" tagmata units would equip themselves at least somewhat similar to their national tendencies - very few horse archers among european Tagmata cataphracts, very common among Turkish units, etc.

[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Gary Teuscher]

[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Gary Teuscher]

[Lafayette C Curtis]