Byzantine military question for the Komnenian period.

I had a few burning questions about Byzantine (Roman) cavalry formations during the Komnenian period - 1081-1204. Firstly, how heavily did the Romans at this time utilize horse archers and mounted archery as part of their cavalry tactics? There are numerous historical references to horse archers in the primary sources, but where any of them equipped as heavy horse archers or were the majority akin to the lighter "Turcopoles" referenced in Crusader accounts of the period?

Finally, would a alt history Rhomania that re-absorbed Anatolia come to utilize mounted archery more effectively if it possessed a larger Turkish population?
 
I had a few burning questions about Byzantine (Roman) cavalry formations during the Komnenian period - 1081-1204. Firstly, how heavily did the Romans at this time utilize horse archers and mounted archery as part of their cavalry tactics? There are numerous historical references to horse archers in the primary sources, but where any of them equipped as heavy horse archers or were the majority akin to the lighter "Turcopoles" referenced in Crusader accounts of the period?

Finally, would a alt history Rhomania that re-absorbed Anatolia come to utilize mounted archery more effectively if it possessed a larger Turkish population?


There are people on the Board here with a more specialist knowledge-base on the subject but I do know that the Komnenian Army had a much greater proportion of mercenaries than earlier Byzantine armies. The field armies had Balkan raised kataphraktoi cavalry as well as Western European heavy cavalry (mercenary) and a large number of Turks (both Byzantinised re-settled Turks or recruited from the Seljuk lands) who filled in the horse archer role but these were in the light cavalry role. The cavalry (all-types) composed roughly 1/4 of the entire field army. Heavy horse archers seemed to have disappeared entirely in the Byzantine army by the time of the Komnenian-era army.

Sure, if somehow Anatolia were re-absorbed, the Komnenoi would have access to more cavalry and critically, better quality cavalry horses, which OTL were in short supply in the Empire. That is assuming of course that the Byzantines would also successfully absorb an appreciable amount of the Turkish and Turkified population.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Herzen! Yes I have been reading many of John Haldon's works, alongside extant military treatises from the Macedonian dynasty, but am still left filling in blank spots for the Komnenoi.

Another question for ye gods of Rhomania on this board: Did the medieval Romans ever use anything akin to sharpened stakes, caltrops or ditches to protect foot archers or infantry from frontal cavalry attacks? I know its a very technical question but there appears to be some debate as to whether stakes were used by the Byzantines as their were later by the Ottomans and English.
 
and also another question posed by reading about the military forces of the Romans, Seljuqs and Ottomans. Is it realistic to propose that the Romans re-develop Cataphract horse archers if they absorb a larger Turkish population (ie: if they re-conquer Anatolia). I find the concept of such heavily armored assault troops fascinating, but was wondering if it would be ASB for a Roman TL in which Anatolia is reconquered to feature them! Merry Christmas to all!

The Saxon
 
Top