RomanArmyTalk

I heard from a source that mid-Republican cavalry were more melee/charge and post-Marian/Imperial cavalry were more on skirmishing, reconnassance, and pursuit.

Battles like Sentinum, Heraclea, Rhone River,Telamon, Zama, Magnesia, Telamon, and Vercelle, both Equites and Italian cavalry seem to have a very agressive stance with bold melee moves.(Telamon, Roman cavalry fought uphill). According to the book "Roman army during the Punic War" the Romans used the Contus lance like Alexander's cavalry. How true is this? Or the Roman cavalry was strong because it dismounted?

According to Joshephus, all Imperial Auxilia cavalry do not like to collide their horses and perferred the Lancea javelins and threw them in a cycle. Arrian also says this I believe in "Arrian's on the Alans." Caesar's cavalry(Foederetii) I believed did some bold charges but I'm not sure if its a melee charge or skirmish charge.

Is the transition from melee cavalry to skirmishing cavalry true?

3rd century Roman Cavalry don't seem to be completely relying on a bold lance charge like Alexander. Judging by Aurelian's campaigns they like withdraw and lure enemy cavalry until they are tired. 4th century Roman cavalry seemed to change a bit with Cataphracts but I believe they were more melee in trout than a full on charge.(Clibinarii at Strasbourg I believe tried to duel the Germanic infantry in melee) According to Ammianus, Roman horsemen often skirmished a lot before charging(Belarasrius campaigns in the East show a lot of this, horse archer duels with the Persians). On the book "Roman Army, Greatest War machine in the Ancient World" it is said the Late Roman cavalry were mainly skirmishers and it was perferred for the Foederetii to do head on charges.(May explain that Paulymayrene Cataphracts were so much agressive than the Roman counterparts) Also shown in the Battle of Chalons right?

"Roman Heavy Cavalry," perhaps a poor choice of topic title... especially considering the dearth of "Heavy" cavalry during the Republican period. Like Moi suggests, look through the RAT Search engine for previous discussions on this topic.

Constantine the Great at Adrianople crossed the river separating his army from that of Licinius with a cavalry force, supported by archers on a slope overlooking the river. He then used the cavalry to begin to roll up Licinius' army from the flank, while his infantry crossed. Constantine's cavalry certainly did not do this by skirmishing. Constantine led his cavalry from the front and was wounded in the thigh.

Most Roman cavalry for most of Roman history could skirmish or use spears for shock-action as circumstances dictated. In the late army specialist cavalry capable only of shock action (cataphracts and contarii) or skirmish action (horse archers) came into use. By the time of Belisarius the standard Roman cavalryman was again equipped for both types of warfare, but this time with a spear and bow rather than spear and javelins.

Am I the only one Who can't Stand permanent mutilation of terms and names like Belarasrius =Belisarius, Foederetii =Foederati, Paulymayrene = Palmyrian...?