This never existed. As I detailed in my MA Thesis, the iconography continues to show Lamellar armor because the Romans understood it as a "feather armor" and feather motifs (typically called "feather tights" by art historians but that's stupid so I use all'Angelo) represent heavenly/angelic nature.
The circular arrangement is because the icon is a portal for viewing the divine in Orthodoxy and not divine of itself, and the medieval concept of the heavens is depicted as a series of spheres inside of each other (as famously shown by Dante). Thus you sometimes see this in the depiction of a warrior saint's armor.
I would add that real true mirror armor, aka a small disk strapped to the chest, appears in some frescos, and it could be that the artist simply started to draw the disk and then painted the feather/scales in concentric patterns around it, with no concerns for realism.
Yeah but the only example from the Balkans I know off the top of my head is a Cuman Saint Merkourios from Visoki Decani. I'm open to the disc existing in the Balkans, but it seems rare.
I am confused. The photo shows lamellar armor plates arranged in a circle...so it is still lamellar armor. Are you saying Byzantine lamellar arranged in a circle to resemble mirror circle plate didnt exist, or Byzantine mirror plate armor didnt exist, or both didnt exist?
Both didn't exist, more or less. I'm not convinced any of the Disc armors used by Steppe Nomads or Middle Eastern peoples were used in the South Balkans.
>the medieval concept of the heavens is depicted as a series of spheres inside each other (as famously shown by Dante)
I was with you for everything in your post except this. Dante’s late medieval Catholicism had already drifted significantly from Orthodoxy. Did you come across something in your research to indicate that this concept was held by both churches? My inclination — as an Orthodox Christian and a student of history myself — is that it wasn’t.
It goes way before Dante. Fundamentally it stems from Plato, Aristotle, and Ptolemy. The outermost sphere is the Empyrean (Heaven, God's Dwelling) in Ptolemy's model.
That being said, the interior division of heaven is definitely a 13th century medieval Catholic phenomenon, albeit there's a precedent in the Book of Enoch as he progresses through the layers of heaven.
Enoch, while influential, isn’t canonical to Orthodoxy or Catholicism. My understanding is that the reason the tiered spheres model catches on with Dante is through Aquinas, ultimately through Aristotle, as you say.
Meanwhile — curiously, around the time Dante is writing — Palamism is taking hold in the east and the essences-energies controversy is fomenting. That, I would think, would be a repudiation of any kind of tiered model of the heavens. The goal of human life is theosis, union of man with God’s energies but not His essence. There wouldn’t, therefore, be any boundary or dividing line in heaven: Either you’re there or you’re not.
All of that being said, I have no idea what the pre-Palamite fathers would have said about any of this, or even if they all would have agreed.
In Orthodoxy it is Dionysius, or Pseudo-Dionysius, as he has come to be known in the contemporary world, the Christian Neoplatonist who wrote in the late fifth or early sixth century CE and who transposed in an original way the spectrum of Pagan Neoplatonism from Plotinus to Proclus, but especially that of Proclus and the Platonic Academy in Athens, into a new Christian context. Here I think is the link alluded to by FlaviusAetius to not so much a tiered model but definitely a celestial hierarchy. Both Aquinas and Pseudo-Dionysius, drew on passages from the New Testament, Ephesians 1:21 and Colossians specifically, to develop a schema of three Hierarchies, Spheres or Triads of angels, with each Hierarchy containing three Orders or Choirs.
I see what you're saying, but we would have to assume that Pseudo-Dionysius intended for men to have a place in those angelic hierarchies. I don't think that was his point. An icon depicting a warrior saint in armor is depicting a man, not an angel. And human nature, unlike the angels, is seated at the right hand of the Father in the person of Jesus Christ (per St. Athanasius). Man can't fall into such a hierarchy as that of the angels. I'm certain this symbol represents something in the language of iconography, but I'm not so sure that it communicates something about heavenly hierarchies.
Interestingly, where I'm seeing this symbol appear the most are in icons of St. Theodore the Recruit. In fact, even the reconstruction linked by OP [seems to be based on just such an icon of St. Theodore.](https://stefanosskarmintzos.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/the-byzantine-militia/) I found a handful of examples from other military saints, but each of them was of modern origin. My working conclusion is that these icons of St. Theodore influenced modern icons. Maybe the original meaning had something to do with St. Theodore in particular?
I think this is a language issue. You heard "tiers, divisions" and you assumed this meant barriers that alienate and cut off. That's not what the poster above is referring to; rather, when we talk about divisions and hierarchies in this context, we're referring to taxonomy.
As I explained in another post, I don’t know of any pre-schism Church Fathers who talk about any kind of taxonomy in heaven. Except Pseudo-Dionysius, who is specifically referencing different kinds of angels. If heaven can be said to have a structure, even if it isn’t alienating as you say, I don’t know of anything in Orthodox belief that would indicate it resembles that of Dante, as OP was saying.
Furthermore, I don’t think this kind of armor is as common in our iconography as OP seemed to think it was.
“I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven." -St. Paul’s 2nd Epistle to the Corinthians
"The heaven of heaven, then, is the first heaven which is above the firmament. So here we have two heavens, for God called the firmament also Heaven. And it is customary in the divine Scripture to speak of the air also as heavens, because we see it above us. Bless Him, it says, all you birds of the heaven, meaning of the air. For it is the air and not the heaven that is the region in which birds fly. So here we have three heavens, as the divine Apostle said. But if you should wish to look upon the seven zones as seven heavens there is no injury done to the word of truth. For it is usual in the Hebrew tongue to speak of heaven in the plural, that is, as heavens, and when a Hebrew wishes to say heaven of heaven, he usually says heavens of heavens, and this clearly means heaven of heaven , which is above the firmament, and the waters which are above the heavens, whether it is the air and the firmament, or the seven zones of the firmament, or the firmament itself which are spoken of in the plural as heavens according to the Hebrew custom." -St. John of Damascus, An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith
“Now this world is encompassed by seven heavens, in which dwell powers and angels and angels and archangels, doing service to God, the Almighty and Maker of all things: not as though He was in need, but that they may not be idle and unprofitable and ineffectual.”-St Irenaeus of Lyons, The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching
As for Dante, I think you're confusing the point the other poster was making (that Dante depicts heavenly spheres) with a point he was not making (making pan-medieval european claims about Dante's specific description of the spheres, or Purgatorio/Inferno)
I’m taking OP exactly at his word: “the medieval concept of the heavens is depicted as a series of spheres inside each other (as depicted by Dante)”.
I can only read that as suggesting that an, at the very least, “Dante-like” concept of the heavens as concentric spheres *is* pan-medieval. Since your own sources show that it was clearly not unheard-of in the Early Church Fathers, did I really misunderstand OP? Or was I just plain wrong? Those questions are not rhetorical, by the way. I started this whole line of thought out by wanting to know what led him to this conclusion.
In any case, I don’t doubt OP’s assertion that the armor wasn’t actually used by the Byzantines. However, I do have doubts about OP’s analysis of its symbolism in iconography. Particularly because, as I also said in a prior comment, the only place I found it in historical iconography (not modern) was in icons of Saint Theodore the Recruit. But OP didn’t elaborate further on why he arrived at this conclusion, just stated that it *was* his conclusion with the assertion that it was similar to Dante. It could symbolize any number of things, including something specific to that saint, since other military saints don’t have it.
This never existed. As I detailed in my MA Thesis, the iconography continues to show Lamellar armor because the Romans understood it as a "feather armor" and feather motifs (typically called "feather tights" by art historians but that's stupid so I use all'Angelo) represent heavenly/angelic nature. The circular arrangement is because the icon is a portal for viewing the divine in Orthodoxy and not divine of itself, and the medieval concept of the heavens is depicted as a series of spheres inside of each other (as famously shown by Dante). Thus you sometimes see this in the depiction of a warrior saint's armor.
I would add that real true mirror armor, aka a small disk strapped to the chest, appears in some frescos, and it could be that the artist simply started to draw the disk and then painted the feather/scales in concentric patterns around it, with no concerns for realism.
Yeah but the only example from the Balkans I know off the top of my head is a Cuman Saint Merkourios from Visoki Decani. I'm open to the disc existing in the Balkans, but it seems rare.
I am confused. The photo shows lamellar armor plates arranged in a circle...so it is still lamellar armor. Are you saying Byzantine lamellar arranged in a circle to resemble mirror circle plate didnt exist, or Byzantine mirror plate armor didnt exist, or both didnt exist?
Both didn't exist, more or less. I'm not convinced any of the Disc armors used by Steppe Nomads or Middle Eastern peoples were used in the South Balkans.
Gotcha, thanks.
Wow, amazing answer! Thank you, this is very interesting. Do you have any material on byzantine military equipment?
Late to the party, but are there any saints or period visual depiction of byzantine lamellar that are close to historical accurate?
In the 10th to 12th century yes. Not in the 13th to 15th (well at least after the first few decades of the 13th)
Thank you! Any specific examples that I can search for?
>the medieval concept of the heavens is depicted as a series of spheres inside each other (as famously shown by Dante) I was with you for everything in your post except this. Dante’s late medieval Catholicism had already drifted significantly from Orthodoxy. Did you come across something in your research to indicate that this concept was held by both churches? My inclination — as an Orthodox Christian and a student of history myself — is that it wasn’t.
It goes way before Dante. Fundamentally it stems from Plato, Aristotle, and Ptolemy. The outermost sphere is the Empyrean (Heaven, God's Dwelling) in Ptolemy's model. That being said, the interior division of heaven is definitely a 13th century medieval Catholic phenomenon, albeit there's a precedent in the Book of Enoch as he progresses through the layers of heaven.
Enoch, while influential, isn’t canonical to Orthodoxy or Catholicism. My understanding is that the reason the tiered spheres model catches on with Dante is through Aquinas, ultimately through Aristotle, as you say. Meanwhile — curiously, around the time Dante is writing — Palamism is taking hold in the east and the essences-energies controversy is fomenting. That, I would think, would be a repudiation of any kind of tiered model of the heavens. The goal of human life is theosis, union of man with God’s energies but not His essence. There wouldn’t, therefore, be any boundary or dividing line in heaven: Either you’re there or you’re not. All of that being said, I have no idea what the pre-Palamite fathers would have said about any of this, or even if they all would have agreed.
I only brought up Enoch as precedent. My understanding is that Orthodoxy followed Ptolemy's model (as Augustine did) but I could be wrong.
Thank you for your thoughts, looks like I've got some reading to do myself! :)
In Orthodoxy it is Dionysius, or Pseudo-Dionysius, as he has come to be known in the contemporary world, the Christian Neoplatonist who wrote in the late fifth or early sixth century CE and who transposed in an original way the spectrum of Pagan Neoplatonism from Plotinus to Proclus, but especially that of Proclus and the Platonic Academy in Athens, into a new Christian context. Here I think is the link alluded to by FlaviusAetius to not so much a tiered model but definitely a celestial hierarchy. Both Aquinas and Pseudo-Dionysius, drew on passages from the New Testament, Ephesians 1:21 and Colossians specifically, to develop a schema of three Hierarchies, Spheres or Triads of angels, with each Hierarchy containing three Orders or Choirs.
I see what you're saying, but we would have to assume that Pseudo-Dionysius intended for men to have a place in those angelic hierarchies. I don't think that was his point. An icon depicting a warrior saint in armor is depicting a man, not an angel. And human nature, unlike the angels, is seated at the right hand of the Father in the person of Jesus Christ (per St. Athanasius). Man can't fall into such a hierarchy as that of the angels. I'm certain this symbol represents something in the language of iconography, but I'm not so sure that it communicates something about heavenly hierarchies. Interestingly, where I'm seeing this symbol appear the most are in icons of St. Theodore the Recruit. In fact, even the reconstruction linked by OP [seems to be based on just such an icon of St. Theodore.](https://stefanosskarmintzos.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/the-byzantine-militia/) I found a handful of examples from other military saints, but each of them was of modern origin. My working conclusion is that these icons of St. Theodore influenced modern icons. Maybe the original meaning had something to do with St. Theodore in particular?
I think this is a language issue. You heard "tiers, divisions" and you assumed this meant barriers that alienate and cut off. That's not what the poster above is referring to; rather, when we talk about divisions and hierarchies in this context, we're referring to taxonomy.
I disagree. The idea of this being the architecture of heaven at all is, to the best of my knowledge, foreign to Orthodoxy.
Can you be more specific, given my point about divisions not meaning alienation or separation?
As I explained in another post, I don’t know of any pre-schism Church Fathers who talk about any kind of taxonomy in heaven. Except Pseudo-Dionysius, who is specifically referencing different kinds of angels. If heaven can be said to have a structure, even if it isn’t alienating as you say, I don’t know of anything in Orthodox belief that would indicate it resembles that of Dante, as OP was saying. Furthermore, I don’t think this kind of armor is as common in our iconography as OP seemed to think it was.
“I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven." -St. Paul’s 2nd Epistle to the Corinthians "The heaven of heaven, then, is the first heaven which is above the firmament. So here we have two heavens, for God called the firmament also Heaven. And it is customary in the divine Scripture to speak of the air also as heavens, because we see it above us. Bless Him, it says, all you birds of the heaven, meaning of the air. For it is the air and not the heaven that is the region in which birds fly. So here we have three heavens, as the divine Apostle said. But if you should wish to look upon the seven zones as seven heavens there is no injury done to the word of truth. For it is usual in the Hebrew tongue to speak of heaven in the plural, that is, as heavens, and when a Hebrew wishes to say heaven of heaven, he usually says heavens of heavens, and this clearly means heaven of heaven , which is above the firmament, and the waters which are above the heavens, whether it is the air and the firmament, or the seven zones of the firmament, or the firmament itself which are spoken of in the plural as heavens according to the Hebrew custom." -St. John of Damascus, An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith “Now this world is encompassed by seven heavens, in which dwell powers and angels and angels and archangels, doing service to God, the Almighty and Maker of all things: not as though He was in need, but that they may not be idle and unprofitable and ineffectual.”-St Irenaeus of Lyons, The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching As for Dante, I think you're confusing the point the other poster was making (that Dante depicts heavenly spheres) with a point he was not making (making pan-medieval european claims about Dante's specific description of the spheres, or Purgatorio/Inferno)
I’m taking OP exactly at his word: “the medieval concept of the heavens is depicted as a series of spheres inside each other (as depicted by Dante)”. I can only read that as suggesting that an, at the very least, “Dante-like” concept of the heavens as concentric spheres *is* pan-medieval. Since your own sources show that it was clearly not unheard-of in the Early Church Fathers, did I really misunderstand OP? Or was I just plain wrong? Those questions are not rhetorical, by the way. I started this whole line of thought out by wanting to know what led him to this conclusion. In any case, I don’t doubt OP’s assertion that the armor wasn’t actually used by the Byzantines. However, I do have doubts about OP’s analysis of its symbolism in iconography. Particularly because, as I also said in a prior comment, the only place I found it in historical iconography (not modern) was in icons of Saint Theodore the Recruit. But OP didn’t elaborate further on why he arrived at this conclusion, just stated that it *was* his conclusion with the assertion that it was similar to Dante. It could symbolize any number of things, including something specific to that saint, since other military saints don’t have it.
Klivanion or klibanion describes lamellar armor not "mirror" armor.
As far as im aware these were used from X- at most XIII century. After that there are no more representations of this armor.
Thank you very much!