Roman Knights on History Channel

[Walhaz]

Before reading this, understand my knowledge of Germanics isn't exactly that great:

The term Knight comes from germanic Chnite. Chnite were mounted lancers who were part of the guard of the leaders of, or the leaders of, small cantons in germanic society. As the Roman Empire crumbled, and the sortes were established in treaties with the barbarians, they became landed in the Roman empire as well, spreading the beginnings of fuedalism into spain, france, and other areas. Chnite weren't particularly rich, recruited from lower cantons, usually posessing no armor although they might have been able to afford helmets.

That's about my understanding of 3rd-6th century Germanic Chnite.

Indeed, Evan, my understanding is that the evolution of European armor derived more from Germanic, and then Frankish influences. True, the Germans did attempt to emulate some aspects of Roman armor, but by the 8th Century Charles Martel's Franks were dismounting from horseback to fight Moorish invaders. That doesn't sound at all like heavy cavalry, more like mounted infantry. So you have a very clear split here from any continuity with the cataphract concept. That's not to say that influences didn't continue, especially in Eastern Europe, where you can see the influence of Asian styles of armor all the way down to the Polish "Winged Hussars" of the 17th Century. Again though, trying to identify the influence of cataphracts over such a time period is not very sustainable. After all, the Mongols evolved as the major military force in Asia, and they were certainly not cataphracts. This creates another very clear split from the cataphract concept.

This is one of the reasons I very rarely bother watching The History Channel.

[Condottiero Magno]

Before reading this, understand my knowledge of Germanics isn't exactly that great:

The term Knight comes from germanic Chnite. Chnite were mounted lancers who were part of the guard of the leaders of, or the leaders of, small cantons in germanic society. As the Roman Empire crumbled, and the sortes were established in treaties with the barbarians, they became landed in the Roman empire as well, spreading the beginnings of fuedalism into spain, france, and other areas. Chnite weren't particularly rich, recruited from lower cantons, usually posessing no armor although they might have been able to afford helmets.

That's about my understanding of 3rd-6th century Germanic Chnite.

Indeed, Evan, my understanding is that the evolution of European armor derived more from Germanic, and then Frankish influences. True, the Germans did attempt to emulate some aspects of Roman armor, but by the 8th Century Charles Martel's Franks were dismounting from horseback to fight Moorish invaders. That doesn't sound at all like heavy cavalry, more like mounted infantry. So you have a very clear split here from any continuity with the cataphract concept. That's not to say that influences didn't continue, especially in Eastern Europe, where you can see the influence of Asian styles of armor all the way down to the Polish "Winged Hussars" of the 17th Century. Again though, trying to identify the influence of cataphracts over such a time period is not very sustainable. After all, the Mongols evolved as the major military force in Asia, and they were certainly not cataphracts. This creates another very clear split from the cataphract concept.

This is one of the reasons I very rarely bother watching The History Channel.

HYW English and French knights periodically dismounted, when the need arose, so would this invalidate them as heavy cavalry? It demonstrates tactical flexibility, in contrast with the terminology and designations of the 19th Century.

Poland is in Central, not eastern Europe and prior to the reforms of the mid/late 16th Century, based on Hungarian light cavalry, the average knight/men-at-arms wouldn't have looked that different from his Western counterpart. What was adopted by the 17th Century, was anima style armour, originating from Italy, perhaps imitating lorica segmentata, based on imagery.

The Mongols had cataphracts riding armored horses, though only small proportion of each force, held in reserve until the right moment.

Feudalism owes more to the Late Roman societal organization instead of something invented by the Germanics.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

It does indeed, but it's important to note the transfer of elements of the landed Germanic society to the landed Roman one. Most of it has to do with the evolution of the Foedus, Germanic law code, and the sortes alloted in said Foedera. As well as the tax evasion, tying of citizens to the land, and recruitment of private armies of the Gallic, Spanish, and Italic Possessores. All of this combined together and culminated in the beginning of feudalism.

[Urselius]

An interesting, but not wholly convincing, look at the nomenclature problem.

http://www.academia.edu/1264318/Cataphra...ifications

The Sutton Hoo helmet is obviously derivative of Roman ridge helmets; some historians have seen in it the probable likeness (with the barbarian decorative elements stripped away) of a Late Roman masked helmet - which we have no extant examples of. A number of iron face masks were found in Istanbul, at the site of the Byzantine Great Palace, these were of 12th century date but were not unlike the Sutton Hoo mask in general form.

Cnicht in Old English just meant servant. Some royal servants were mounted and were called rad-cnichtas 'road-servants'. As early Norman milites were primarily just the armed retainers of lords the English called them cnichtas as well. Only later did the term knight become descriptive of an elevated social position (during the 12th century).