05-26-2010, 12:09 AM
Quote:I was more thinking in the way of chnaging horses completely, not of bringing more horses along. For they, like the others, can't take the pace of a forced march as well as the infantry. Junkelmann lists some very good examples from the Amercican civil war as well as WW I, where the infantry is initially left behind, but always catches up and after several days outmarches the cavalry.Quote:Mobility in cavalry is only battlefield mobility. Infantry marches faster than horses. Unless you're thinking of changing horsesInteresting point. I guess I don't know anything about Byz. remount practices but its pretty standard cavalry practice to have a low cost riding horse plus the extremely valuable trained fighting horse, if not two. On the other hand, we do know from the Stratekon that the cavalry (normally) had a fairly large horse-drawn wagon train in tow, with numerous servants, ( one servant for each senior trooper and one servant for every 2-3 junior, IIRC). Also I am confident that 17th C. mounted infantry (true dragoons) mounted on nags with only a small pool of remounts to make up casulties, had better operational mobility than the foote infantry, because, when the Poles operated in the wide steppe they often left the foote behind and only had dragoons for infantry.
every 3 days, which I don't think was a Byzantine tactic.
I'd be interested to learn more about those Polish examples - were they also from a march or from tactical operations? Operational mobility on a single day is certainly different from operational mobility after a week of marching, in which the stamina of the man is better than the stamina of the horse.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)