Steven
Lowe
In 988 CE
as part of a treaty which included a dynastic marriage and territorial
concessions, Tsar Vladimir of Kiev sent 6000 Swedish soldiers to Byzantine
Emperor Basil II. It is thought that the six thousand
sent by Vladimir were formed by Basil into a unit of Imperial bodyguards - the Varangian Guard. (Blöndal &
Benedikz p.43) The
Varangians were known in Byzantium as the pelekephoroi, or
Axe-bearers, from their customary weapon, the two-handed axe.
In the succeeding two centuries, contingents of Vikings and,
(particularly after the Norman Conquest of England), Anglo-Saxons, traveled to
Constantinople to join this élite group.
Varangian Armour
It would be reasonable to assume that as Imperial bodyguards, the Varangians would be expected to wear armour in battle. If only for self-protection, the Emperor would want to ensure that those charged with keeping him alive were not killed themselves. However, it is unlikely that many new recruits had their own armour; in northern and western Europe, the recruitment pools from which these guardsmen came, it was scarce and expensive. It is my contention that the majority of new Varangian Guardsmen, arriving without armour, or even helmets, would have been supplied with Byzantine armour from the Imperial arsenal.
The only
contemporary representation of Varangians in action, in an illuminated copy of
the historical Chronicle of John Skylitzes, held in the Bibliotéca Naçional in
Madrid show the Varangians in armour of Byzantine style. Though there are
questions about how accurate a portrayal of Varangians this is, it’s the only
representation we have, and shouldn’t be dismissed lightly.
Although the Varangian Guard appears often in contemporary sources, there is almost no mention of what armour, if any, they wore. However, this is not unusual; armour is rarely described in such accounts unless it is important to the narrative, and even then the language used is often formulaic rather than descriptive.
It was customary for Byzantine writers to use the phraseology of the Ancient authors in their own writings. The classical formula for “full armour” consisted of helmet and shield, and the Byzantine authors faithfully copied this terminology, whether or not it accurately described the facts. For example in the Alexiad, Anna Komnena refers in the same sentence to a soldier being “fully armed with helmet and shield”, and then to a weapon piercing his corselet.
There is only one definite reference to Varangians wearing armour, and even that is somewhat equivocal. Anna Komnena describes the Varangians at the battle of Dyrrakhion (C.E. 1081) as
“growing very quickly tired from the
weight of their arms”
The problem is that the term she uses to
describe their armour is ‘oplwn
(hoplon). The Greeks used this word
indiscriminately to mean all kinds of
military accoutrements, including both weapons and armour. However, from the
context, it’s fairly clear Anna is referring to armour. (Alexiad)
Another account of the same battle claims that the Varangians were without armour (Anonymi Vaticani Historia Sicula). However, this is one of 3 accounts so nearly identical they appear to have been copied from the same source, and the only one of the three to mention lack of armour.
Michael Psellos’ describes his encounter with Imperial pretender Isaac Komnenos surrounded by his soldiers, including Varangians. He does not mention any armour (Walker, 1998 p.20), but this is not unusual for Psellos. He almost never refers to it in any of his writings.
Armour and Mobility
It is likely that an infantry unit in full
armour would have been so weighed down that they could not have kept up with
the rest of the army, or would have become too exhausted to fight. Emperor
Maurice makes provision for even cavalry not to wear armour while on the march
unless there was evidence of danger. (Stategikon) However, there is
considerable evidence to suggest that the Varangians were mounted infantry.
Firstly, it was common for Vikings when
raiding to steal horses and ride them to raid, but they fought as infantry. In
the battle of Maldon the Anglo-Saxons rode to the battlefield but fought on
foot. (Bradley pp. 519-20) And at the
battle of Dyrrakhion, the Varangians arrived on horseback, but dismounted to
fight. (Anna Komnena - Blöndal/Benedikz p. 126)
Also the fight in 1000 AD between Varangians
and Iberians in which 30 men of rank among the Iberians were killed, including
their Grand Prince (Asochik of Armenia - ibid .
p. 47), began with an argument over a bale of hay:
“A certain soldier from the Russian
infantry was carrying hay for his horse, when one of the Iberians went up to
him and took the hay away from him. At this another Russian came running up to
help his fellow-countryman, and the Iberian now called for help from his
compatriots. . .”
If the
Varangians were mounted infantry, the issue of mobility over long distances in
armour wouldn’t arise. On the other hand when referring to Heavy Infantry the
Præcepta Militaria of Emperor Nikephoros Phokas states:
“Those on foot unable to keep up with the
cavalry because of the length of the march or fatigue should have an extra mule
each to carry him and bring along their provisions.” (McGeer II, 5-7)
This
would enable even armoured infantry to travel at considerable speed.
Bodyguards?
Russian Vikings, referred to as Varangians or Rhos, had been joining the Byzantine army since the middle of the ninth century, but as mercenary auxiliaries of relatively minor use. In the first century or so they served in the Imperial armies, they occupied a fairly lowly position (Walker, 1998 p.19). However, I believe that it is necessary to distinguish between the early Varangians and those who arrived later, whose value and closeness to the Emperor and his family had risen, and who indeed seem to have been a regiment of Imperial bodyguards
There are many accounts of the position the later Varangians held in the Imperial system:
“those who from of old were set as life-guards (my italics) to protect the Emperor’s person . . . Some of them bore swords, others spears and others bore heavy axes of iron on their shoulders.” (Anna Komnena - Blöndal /Benedikz, p128)
“. . . those who speak the Danish tongue are foremost in the mercenary force of Constantinople, and the Emperor uses them as his life-guards.” (Saxo Grammaticus - ibid. p 131). The Varangians are again described as life-guards later in the same text. Even allowing for some exaggeration from what is admittedly a Danish source, one has to place some credence on this description.
“ . . . the Normans had pressed so hard on the Englishmen that the Emperor moved them to Byzantium and made them into his life-guards . . .” (Orderic Vitalis - ibid p. 147)
In the battle of Beroe says The Emperor “ took his life-guards (my italics) who had as weapons very long shields and single-edged axes . . .” (Niketas Khoniates - ibid p 151)
In a Viking account of the same battle the
Emperor describes the Varangians as “his
wineskins . . . his treasures”. (Snorri Sturlusson - ibid. p149)
The Varangians were used on guard duty in the Mangana and Vlakhernai Palaces, Hagia Sofia cathedral, and by the Khalke gates in the Imperial quarter. They were also “allocated a room in the uppermost part of the palace”, hardly quarters for mere mercenaries. (ibid p118-9, 181-2). When Alexios I took his army to Dyrrakhion he left behind in the City only 300 men “together with the Varangians charged with the defence of the Imperial Palaces” (Anna Komnena - ibid. p123). Psellos also refers to them as palace guards. (Chronographia, p. 359)
The Varangians’ were known for their “Uncompromising fidelity to the legitimate heirs of the Emperor to whom they had originally take oaths of fidelity . . .” (ibid
When Alexios Komnenos gained entry to the City on his way to seizing the Imperial diadem, he suborned the German regiment, as he realised it would be impossible to get the Byzantine "Immortals" and the Varangians (my italics) to change sides. (Anna Komnena - ibid. p120)
The surprising lenience shown by Emperor Nikephoros after an assassination attempt by Varangians is possibly evidence of the favour and status they held, and perhaps of the Emperor’s belief that he needed their support more than he needed justice for what really amounted to treason.
The
Varangian Guard was an élite group, and membership was not automatic. When
Thormoth Indrithason wanted to join the Guard, the Emperor thought he was too
small and said he would not be able to do a man’s job. He was convinced otherwise by seeing
Thormoth slaughter an enormous bull, hewing its head off with a single stroke.
If the Varangians were indeed the Emperor’s bodyguards, it follows that they would probably have been heavily armoured, unlike other footsoldiers in Imperial service. They would be expected to have helmet, armour, shield and a good weapon as a bare minimum.
Level of Armament
among the Varangians’ “Personnel Pools”
The highest level of armour in northern and
western Europe at this time consisted of a byrnie or brnja (a
shirt of mail, made from up to thirty-thousand interlinked iron rings) and a
conical helmet with a noseguard or nasal. In addition a mail hood or coif,
was worn, or a mail curtain (aventail) attached to the helmet
itself. In the mid-late 11th century, the byrnie usually
reached to the knees with wide elbow length sleeves. A shield completed the
panoply – originally circular, but in the second half of the 11th
century giving way to a long “kite” shaped shield with greater protection to
the lower part of the body, particularly the legs. There is some evidence of
chausses (mail leggings) among the Normans as early as the Bayeux Tapestry (c. 1070), but
it seems to have been very rare, and confined to the highest members of the
ruling class (B.T. -
panels 49 and 55).
Both the Viking and Anglo-Saxon armies had
of a core of highly experienced and well-equipped “professional” warriors, plus
a larger group drawn from the landed class and petty nobility. It is difficult
to form a clear idea of how comprehensively the Norsemen were armoured, because
of the paucity of surviving information. That they had mail and helmets we know
– there are several finds in the archaeological record, of which the Gjermundbu
helmet and mail-shirt are the best examples, as well as some metal plates found
in Birka that indicate that lamellar armour was not unknown. The literary record also contains evidence –
for example the sagas tell us that Harald Hardrada had a mailshirt named Emma,
but contemporary Viking sources are mostly uninformative. Viking art showing
warfare is almost completely confined to standing stones, in which the detail
is insufficient to form a clear idea of whether the figures are wearing armour.
The battle scenes in the Bayeux Tapestry show a large proportion of well-armoured warriors, but most contemporary
illustrations are more like the early 11th century picture in the
British Library (MS Cotton Claudius B. iv, fol 25r), which shows an army in
which only the king wears a mail-shirt, and nobody has a helmet.
Mentions of armour in contemporary written
accounts are sparse. Two 11th century references give some
indication.
Firstly the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle tells us
that in 1008, King Ethelred II ordered the production of ships and armour; “ . . . one warship from
three hundred and 10 hides, and from 8 hides a helmet and mailcoat” (ASC, p138). A hide is the amount of land that would
support a family – generally about 120 acres. It has been estimated that there
were about 70,000 hides in England at this time (McLynn, p.148), so full
mobilization would have produced about 230 ships, each with 38 mailshirts and
helmets, enough for most of the crew. But this order was specifically to build
a fleet to repulse the Viking incursions, at a time of great military need - it
is doubtful whether production was continued after the original order was
carried out, (particularly as the fleet which had been built with such pains
was destroyed within a year), let alone through the succeeding reigns.
The other major source of information is the
heriot – a form of death duty paid to the king for the right of succession to
lands. In 1020-23 Knut, the Danish king of England, laid down the heriot of
each earl as 4 helmets, 4 coats of mail, 8 horses (of which 4 were to be
provided with saddles), 4 swords, 8 spears, 8 shields and 200 mancuses of gold.
For a thegn who was close to the king it was 2 horses (one with a saddle), one
sword, 2 spears, 2 shields and 50 mancuses of gold. A lesser thegn was required
to provide a horse and its trappings and his weapons. (Edge and Paddock p. 29)
The heriot appears to have been a means by
which the king supplied his troops, presumably his personal huscarls, with the
wherewithal for war. But as only the great earls were required to provide
helmets and armour, and as a great earl didn’t die every day, this would still
not provide a great amount of armour to the king.
It also raises the question of how well an
earl’s own supporters were equipped, if his requirement was only four helmets
and mailshirts. And what does this tell us about the average warrior? It
appears that those lower in the social structure were not well equipped at all.
Even the heriot of a King’s thegn does not include a helmet or mail shirt –
does this mean they did not have them themselves?
It has been estimated that the English
system of the 11th century, where one in five households provided a
warrior to the fyrd (militia) to be supported and maintained by the
other four, would have produced 14,000 warriors, and that an exhaustive
conscription could have produced up to 60,000 (McLynn, p.148).
Another estimate (Edge & Paddock, pp
15-16) gives England’s total defence force as 24,000, of whom perhaps 4200 were
“top rank” warriors, likely to have had full armour - 3000 in the king’s own
huscarls plus another 300 or so for each of the four great earls - and
15-20,000 in the “select” fyrd.
Taking McLynn’s figure of 60,000 for full
conscription, the balance of about 36,000 would be from the Great Fyrd, who
were peasant levies. If this is true, the great majority of the army would have
been ill-armed at best. The evidence of the heriot suggests that even in
England, which was a wealthy country, a thegn may not have had a mailshirt, or even
a helmet.
Graeme Walker proposes that post-Conquest
Anglo-Saxons of the thegnly class formed a large proportion of the later
Varangian Guard (Walker, 1995 p.21). By 1086, over 4000 English thegns
had been dispossessed, according to the Domesday Book (Morgan p. 105).
However, as mentioned above, they may still
have been relatively poorly equipped. Arms and armour were very expensive, a
sword costing as much as 120 oxen or 15 slaves (Edge & Paddock p. 26), and
a thegn might own no more than 5 hides of land. (Morgan p. 98-100). Walker also
makes the point (Walker, 1998 p.20). that a horse was regarded as a
priority for a thegn, above armour, and this is borne out by contemporary
illustrations.
If the make-up of the Viking force of 6000
sent to Byzantium in 988, and later contingents as well, were of similar
proportions, most of them would have been quite poorly equipped on arrival.
Even if a higher proportion than usual were “professional” warriors and owned a
helmet and armour, they would still have been a relatively small fraction of
the overall number.
Varangian Equipment
It is likely that those who had their own
helmet and mailshirt on joining the Varangian Guard would have kept them; if
they became officers, like Bolli Bollasson and Harald Sigurdsson, they might
have been issued with better quality Byzantine armour. Byzantium was the
richest and most powerful realm in Christendom; for the remainder to be
properly armoured it is my contention that they would have been supplied with
Byzantine military issue from the Imperial armoury. Favourite weapons would
have been kept – particularly their two-handed axes - and only replaced if they
were damaged or lost.
Though they used mailshirts, the Byzantines
had two other important types of armour – scale, made of small plates of iron,
horn or hardened leather attached to a backing and overlapping downwards, and
the lamellar klibanion, made of similar plates, but overlapping upwards,
and laced directly to each other. Lamellar seems to have been the most common type
of Byzantine armour, and most Varangians may have been
issued with it. It would have been simple functional army issue, without
decoration or sophistication - for example, the plates of the klibanion might
have been square, not rounded, at the top (as shown in some contemporary
portrayals), and the armour might have consisted of a corselt only, without armoured sleeves or skirt. They could also have had padded greaves and
vambraces for legs and arms. (Despite their popularity among reenactors, the evidence for splinted greaves or vambraces in a Byzantine or Varangian context is so thin as to be dismissed.) Shields wear out after a reasonably short time,
and would have been replaced with Byzantine ones, which could be either
round or kite-shaped.
The Madrid Skylitzes Chronicle
mentioned above contains an illustration of Varangians with typical Byzantine
helmets and shields, but they have two-handed axes and what appear to be mail
corselets, not lamellar. On the other hand, the artist in question routinely
puts Byzantine soldiers in the same armour, so there is very little to be
concluded from this.
This document shows many types of Byzantine
helmets. A Varangian unit would probably have had a mixture of them all. Byzantine
helmets usually had a “curtain” of mail, lamellar or scale armour, or even
padded cloth, called an aventail, to protect the back of the neck.
Hardly any Byzantine helmets seem to have had nasals, though in some at least,
it appears that the aventail covered not only the back of the neck, but also
the face (with eyeholes).
Byzantium was
the mightiest, richest and most sophisticated civilization in Christendom. It seems unlikely that its Emperor would
knowingly endanger his own safety and by extension, that of his Empire, by
allowing his personal bodyguards to be vulnerable to the first weapon that came
their way. On the balance of probabilities, I think we can assume that whatever
their social origins as individuals, as members of the Varangian Guards they
would have been well equipped, with Byzantine armour from the Imperial arsenal.
I must
acknowledge the help of Tim Dawson and Graeme Walker, particularly in providing
Primary source quotes from Anna Komnena and Michael Psellos relating to the armour
issue.
References
Alexiad Anna Komnena
The Anglo-Saxon
Chronicles (ASC). (trans.
Swanton, M.) Phoenix Press, London 1996
Chronographia Michael Psellos (published as Fourteen Byzantine Rulers, trans. Sewter,
E.R.A.), Penguin 1966
La Tapisserie de Bayeux (B.T.), ed. LeFranc,
R. Ville de Bayeux,
Beatson, P. Another
Illustration of Varangian from the Skylitzes Manuscript, Madrid Varangian
Voice No. 23, July 1992
Blöndal, S &
Benedikz, B. The Varangians of Byzantium,
Cambridge University Press, 1978
Bradley, S.D., Anglo-Saxon Poetry, Dent & Sons, London, 1982.
Dawson, T.
Kremasmata, Kabadion, Klibanion: Some aspects of middle Byzantine military
equipment reconsidered, Byzantine and
Modern Greek Studies, 22, (1998) pp. 38 - 50.
Dennis, G.T., Three Byzantine Military Treatises, Dumbarton Oaks
Texts, Washington, 1985.
Edge, D. & Paddock, J.M. Arms and
Armour of the Mediaeval Knight, Bison, London 1988
Haldon, J.F., Some Aspects of Byzantine Military Technology from the
Sixth to the Tenth Centuries, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies,
Vol. 1, 1985.
Lowe, S. The adoption of Byzantine equipment and
customs by the Varangian Guards, Varangian Voice 37, Nov 1995
McGeer, E. Sowing the Dragon’s Teeth; Byzantine Warfare in the Tenth Century.
Dumbarton Oaks,Washington 1995
McLynn, F. 1066 The Year
of Three Battles. Jonathan Cape,
London 1998.
Morgan, K.O. The
Oxford Illustrated History of Britain, Oxford University press 1984
Shephard,
J. The English and Byzantium, a study of their
rôle in the Byzantine army in the late eleventh century. Traditio vol 29,
1973
Walker, G.
How Heavily Armoured Were The
Emperor’s Varangians?
Varangian Voice No 47, May 1998.
Walker, G. The English Varangians,
Varangian Voice No. 35, May 1995
Walker, G., Letter to the editor, Varangian Voice No 47, May 1998.
