Armament and Cavalry Warfare in the Avar-Age Carpathian Basin 393
methods were used long before the European appearance of the stirrup. Here
stability was secured by the use of a high saddle bow or horned saddle, before
the stirrup is attested by Roman and Sassanian saddles.17 However, the intro-
duction of the stirrup could enhance the effectiveness of these fighting meth-
ods, for as well as improved stability and comfort, this innovation did not so
restrict the movements of the mounted warrior.18
Recently, the possibility of the Byzantine transmission of the strirrup to
Europe has emerged, based on the observation that the description of Pseudo-
Maurice did not mention the stirrup among the many innovations borrowed
by the Byzantine cavalry from the Avars.19 The typological differences between
the stirrups of the Carpathian Basin and the Merovingian world was empha-
sised by Mechtild Schulze-Dörlamm, though she linked the European appear-
ance of this artefact to the Avars,20 whereas the spread of the stirrup was partly
due to Byzantine transmission.21
If Byzantium did not copy the use of the stirrup from the Avars, the only way
to have acquired it would have been via the Middle East. The Silk Road played a
significant role in the transmission of technical innovation, though its last sec-
tion passed through Sassanian Iran. However, the only trace there for the use
of stirrup is the representation of a horse from the rock relief of Taq-i Bustan,
from the reign of Khusraw II (591–628).22 The only stirrup known from the
Sassanians is a silver example from the art trade, without further any further
information as to its origins.23 All of these are chronologically contemporane-
ous with the Avar finds.
17 This saddle type (‘Hörnchensattel’) is known both from Iran (Ghirshman 1973, 94–107) and
the Roman Empire ( Junkelmann 1992, 36, 71).
18 According to the most recent interpretation on the effect of stirrup on warfare this arte-
fact permitted a change of weapons (bow and spear) during battle (Curta 2008, 314).
19 Maurice I. 2. in Dennis – Gammilscheg 1981, 81. Maurice did not mention the Avar ori-
gin of the stirrup (von Freeden 1991, 624; Nawroth 2001, 129). For Avar influences on
the Byzantine army, see: Darkó 1934, 3–40; Darkó 1935, 443–469; Darkó 1937, 119–147;
Szádeczky-Kardoss 1983, 317–326; Szádeczky-Kardoss 1986, 203–214).
20 Schulze-Dörlamm 2006, 490–492.
21 The more recent study on the early European stirrups did not conclude on their Avar or
Byzantine origin but emphasised the existence of very early Byzantine examples (Curta
2008, 315–318).
22 The representation of the Khusraw on horseback is unfortunately not intact but on
the scene on fallow-deer hunting his foot is horizontal suggesting the use of the stirrup
(Overlaet 1993, 93).
23 From the site Cheragh ’Ali Tepe (Daylaman province) (Böhner – Ellmers – Weidemann
1972, 40; Werner 1974, 115. Abb. 5/6; Werner 1984b, 150. Abb. 158; Overlaet 1993, 93. 187).