+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Allies & Enemies of Rome (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc) (/showthread.php?tid=6780)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - cagwinn - 02-15-2010
Quote:cagwinn:259p4wm8 Wrote:I would be happy to pick up the discussion of Arthur's name and the etymology of Excalibur, etc, on one of my Celtic culture mailing lists - would it be OK to post a link, Robert?Fine by me Chris. Arthurnet? :wink:
I was thinking that it would suit my "From Celtica to Camelot" list - it's been quiet there now for some time and could use a new thread.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/celtica-camelot/
If any of you want to discuss Arthurian-related etymologies with me, this is the best place.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 02-15-2010
Hello back, Agraes
Been awhile.
I was discussing stuff in the Late Roman Cavalryman by MacDowall. He shows a photo (p.17) of an original and reconstuction of what looks like manica, captioned, "Right: Additional leg and arm defences, like this example from Scotland, would have been worn by Roman cataphracts. A unit of cataphratarii was stationed in north Britain during this period. [AD 236-565 is the time-range of his book.] Far right: A modern reconstruction of a laminated thigh guard." Both pieces are identified in this manner: (National Museums of Scotland).
They look like the ones in Christa Hook's color illustration as worn in the Triumph of Constantius (AD 357). Evidently, she used Ammianus Marcellinus, XVI, 10, 7-10, "Thin iron plates, fitted to the curves of their bodies, completely covering their limbs; so that whichever way they had to move their members, their garment fitted, so skillfully were the joinings made."
Long ago, even before I was a child, :lol: Skene claimed, "The Equites Catafractarii were stationed at Morbium, supposed by Horsley to be Templeburgh on the south bank of the Don." (Celtic Scotland, p.103, note 41). Whether we can trust old farts who were even older than I am?-- anybody's guess, really. We do know that the Equites Catafractarrii were listed for Britain in the Notitia Dignitatum. But whether they actually made it to "Morbium" is another matter. :?
I suppose we cannot dismiss the Catafractarii, but my gut feeling is that John's Equites Taifali in both Seniores and Juniors were the Roman units that influenced both Britain and Aromorica, as the laws you transcribed indicate. Thanks for giving us that.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - ArthuroftheBritons - 02-16-2010
:lol: Alanus,
No matter how nutty some things turn out to be they can take us in interesting directions. Here I was going a little Arthurian crazy :oops: and then realising that the Cataphractarii were probably out of the picture and then you come out with this brand new information which turned the entire discussion on its head! Well, well, well the Cataphractarii are back in the equation. Things just get stranger and stranger. The comments on horse breeding are interesting and Agraes' account of a Breton battle against the Franks has just rocked my world. I had abandoned the idea that British/Breton cavalry were used the smash the shield wall head on, but it seems as though they did just that and with minimal casualties. That same account makes me think that the 'four sided weapon' Bedwyr is said to have used was in far greater useage than I thought. It said that the Franks were completelty unprepared for the Breton's agressive and terrrifying cavalry and if they stayed in close ranks even then they had no defense because the javelins would take them down one by one. I'm also starting to think the Tailfali were in fact the official cavalry of "Arthur". However when it comes to lance armed cavalry I must accept almost defeat. The only cavalry Alae to use lances were likely the Scutarii Aureliaci and the Tailfali whereas the rest of the cavalry likely used swords and javelins with light leather scale armour.
On a new front I'm starting to find a connection between the many different versions of Christianity tied together with paganism to form the mysticism and magic of Arthurian legend. 8) More on that next time. In my own humble opinion I think they bred the horses for courage, speed and stamina. A deadly combination in gureilla style fighting force.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 02-16-2010
Back to Arthurofthebritons,
Ahh! But remember that if the Equites Catafractarii were stationed in Britain, and if this date were post-396-397, then we would have cavalrymen using the contus. Also it appears the sub-Roman British arsenal included the Roman bow. The bow is illustrated on British villa floors and also in the Vatican ms of Vergilius' works, supposedly written around 600 in the West Country in high Latin similar to what Gildas used. Arguments for Britain's innate dampness negating the effectiveness of the steppe-compound bow are weak. I use one built from original materials, horn, sinew, and sturgeon bladder glue. And Maine is a wet place. Also look at the Mogul bow, a famed steppe bow used effectively in India where the Moguls ended up, complete with Monsoon seasons.
But, as mentioned ad nausium, I still think the backbone of sub-Roman Britain's cavalry was an extension, generationally, from the two alas of Equite Taifali. Simply because the Taifali and their horses and cattle are at least recorded, while the Catafractarii are not. (Yet, the more studied, the more the Notitia Dignitatum appears to have a realistic foundation.) I only wish the genetic lineage of the horses were as well defined as that of the cattle.
We must remember that the horses were not necessilarily bred for size, but more for maneuverability and leg-strength. The Fell Pony Museum has some interesting info on the internet, or it did at one time. Seems certain farms even had documented evidence of their usage for breeding Roman horses; and Roman horses do not necessarily equate with "Roman" as in "Italian." Frankly the Welsh Cob could descend from a "Roman" breed, which could have been, in actuality, a steppe breed. Here again, the real authority is the inimitable John Conyard, not me. :lol:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - ArthuroftheBritons - 02-16-2010
Ah yes, the allmighty if. The bane of all theorists. I'm not disagreeing with you about the Taifali, I am saying that they were the primary cavalry force of the Britons, but chances are they were split up under "Arthur's" twelve captains who later became the knights of the round table.
However I did promise an interesting cross-religious explanation of many of the intriguing bits of Arthurian mysticism. Now I know this is going to sound cheesy but it seems that all religions that had a touch in the magical bits of the legends are wrapped up in Myrddin. All evidence from the records and your own ideas seem to point to the Taifali having a sarmatianized version of Christianity. The sword, just like to the knights of the middle ages, was a cruicifix representation. The weapon of destruction and sin became the focal point of their worship. Chances are they plunged this sword, maybe the same one over the centuries, into a cairn of stones during worship, and they would likely only go into battle with this sword in their leader's hand. When the last of their commanders died no one touched the sword and the Taifali became reluctant to fight. That is until Myrddin came around. (Myrddin was actually born around AD460) Myrddin was already held in high regards by the Catholic Romano-British nobels who saw him as a charismatic priest who inspired the people, the people with their Cletic Christian group saw him as a Christian Druid because of his accurate perdictions of how leaders would act, and his usage of a Druid's tricks, and he knew about the sword. So taking "Arthur" to release the sword from the stones was a way to unleash the deadly horsemen and it was a way to religiously tie the people together. Thus you have Cletic Christian theology and priests play a role in shaping the character of Merlin, Sarmatinized Christianity adding the sword in the stone and possibly Excalibur as a military 'divine right' power trip, and mush that together with those bear handled cups and mainstream Catholics. And voila! The complex world of Arthurian theology. (I know it does sound Linda Melcorish but bear with me)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 02-16-2010
to Arthurofthebritons,
The above is a digression from the subject, and it dilutes any probabilities discussed on this thread. Whether or not there ever was a Merlin or 12 captians, or even a singular "Arthur, can only be discussed as legend. It would be better to speculate fact. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but if we cannot refrain from legendary material, then the POWERS THAT BE are going to HIT THIS THREAD HARD and that will be the end of it.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Alanus - 02-17-2010
Hello, Ron
The "feinted retreats" described as the Bretons' tactic do sound VAGUELY familiar.
hock: Must be the ghost of King Sangiban!
Borrowed from someone nearby? Well, we find Alans around Orleans, and Taifali at Poitiers. Not too far away from the Bretons. :wink:
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Agraes - 02-17-2010
Again like I pointed out earlier, even if the 9th century Breton cavalry does look similar to steppe cavalry it does not necessarly mean a common tradition. Even the quoted author, Reginon of Prum, does at one point compare Magyar and Breton cavalry tactics, saying the only difference between them was that the Bretons fought with darts and not bows.
However those light cavalry tactics were really common in the ancient world before the general adoption of the stirrup, and were used by Celts (including those Brittunculi horsemen from North of the Hadrian Wall in the 1st or 2nd century AD), Maurs and Romans.
If the Taifali had an impact on later Briton cavalry, it was as a roman unit.
ArthurOfTheBritons, please avoid any arthurian-related discussion in this topic from now. Several from us strongly disagrees with your point of view as stated before and I think the mods' may have to unleash their famous magic powers otherwise!
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - ArthuroftheBritons - 02-17-2010
I appologise again, :oops: my basis in this era is arthurian, it's hard not to refer back to it. But while i was wallowing in embarassment I realised something, Sub-Roman cavalry has a system strikingly similar to Alexander the Great's companion cavalry. But more on that later, for now I will just say that I will try not to refer to "Arthur" again. (Please don't blame me if I do, I'm an almost unstopable Arthurian fanatic
)
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Carvettia - 02-17-2010
Quote:We must remember that the horses were not necessilarily bred for size, but more for maneuverability and leg-strength. The Fell Pony Museum has some interesting info on the internet, or it did at one time. Seems certain farms even had documented evidence of their usage for breeding Roman horses;
The FP Museum still does have some of this info (I'm the webmaster). However, the reference to farms with documented evidence of horse breeding is from the Slaidburn area of Lancashire and is actually from much later than Roman. We might assume a tradition of horsebreeding, but I have to admit it's not certain and there is a large undocumented gap of time before the info I mention. [url:g9epshi9]http://www.fellpony.f9.co.uk/fells/rom_dark/roman1.htm[/url]
Incidentally guys, if you have any corrections for my info there I'd welcome a heads-up about them.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Robert Vermaat - 02-17-2010
Quote:Ah yes, the allmighty if. The bane of all theorists. I'm not disagreeing with you about the Taifali, I am saying that they were the primary cavalry force of the Britons, but chances are they were split up under "Arthur's" twelve captains who later became the knights of the round table.
ONE Where did you get the notion that the Taifali were the primary cavalry force in britain? Sources, please. Afaik they were just one unit among many cavalry units in britain. PLUS, as John Conyard rightly points out, as far as we know these taifali were a Roman cavalry unit with a tribal name, and we have no guarantees that even a single Taifali tribesman served among them. The use of 'tribal' or 'heroic' unit names in the Late Roman army is an old one, and so far the conclusion has never been reached that that every 'trabal' name suggested soldiers from that ethnic group.
[moderator]TWO. Please leave Arthur alone. It does not belong to this thread, nor on this forum. Such unsubstantiated stuff as when Myrddin was born is interesting to other forums, please refrain from posting on those topics any further. Yes, this is a formal warning. PM me if you disagree. [/moderator]
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - ArthuroftheBritons - 02-17-2010
:oops:
Like I said, out of control Arthurian maniac.... However I suppose I should explain why I said I think the organization is similar to Companion cavalry. The poem Y Gododdin (I just know I'm going to be killed for this) seems to refer to a red and white uniform for the cavalry (Reviewing poem now, but as of posting time I'm trusting Osprey's Arthur and the Anglo-Saxon Wars) and also to at least mail armour. (Stanza 58) This warband's men are called "champions" and it says that there were "Three hundred men" and at least one of them, likely the commander, was "clad in purple". It also says that they were "gold torqued" does that mean that they were noblemen? I'm not an expert with that sort of thing. Well, apart from the armour it seems that this warband was modled after Alexander the Great's Royal Squadron. The number, identification with nobility, and seemingly similar arangment of weapons leads me to believe that some sort of highly trained, vaugley Roman style of cavalry survived until this crushing blow at the hands of the Saxons where this unit was destroyed save for one, the author himself. The cavalry seems to be armoured with mail, perhaps a Burgh Castle style helmet, maybe some scale armour, and small shield. The poem also implies that the four-sided spear was used along with javelins and a spatha style longsword. Please tell me if I am rambling or using this poem too much (Honestly I think I might be) or if I'm wrong, the Macedonian cavalry is not my specialty.
Also very interesting the poem says that they rode into battle on "shaggy mounts" that were "the hue of swans". Would anyone happen to know a northern pony with shaggy fur and a tendency to be white?
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Robert Vermaat - 02-17-2010
Well, discussing the military aspects of this poem is not the same as what you've been discussing earlier. Plus the Y Goddoddin, apart from a single name, has no Arthurian connections, whereas it surely is about post-Roman British cavalry.
Quote:Please tell me if I am rambling or using this poem too much (Honestly I think I might be) or if I'm wrong, the Macedonian cavalry is not my specialty.Yes and yes.
Quote: Well, apart from the armour it seems that this warband was modled after Alexander the Great's Royal Squadron. The number, identification with nobility, and seemingly similar arangment of weapons leads me to believe that some sort of highly trained, vaugley Roman style of cavalry survived until this crushing blow at the hands of the Saxons where this unit was destroyed save for one, the author himself.How so? Alexander lived roughly 900 years before the defeat of the Goddoddin - how could the one be based on the other?
The number is random, or rather common, but unrelated. Plus, it has been suggested, the relatively low number fails to mention the grooms and/or common men fighting alongside these picked men.
Nobility? Hardly. IF you knew more about this, you'd have known that it was a mercenary force, gather by king Mynyddawg of the Goddoddin. Warriors or reknown, with some princes among them, but surely not all. Plus, how would that compare to Alexander's professional (and surely not all-noblemen) cavalry? Similar weapons? How on earth so?
Besides, this force was destroyed attacking/defending a fortress, not fighting in a cavalry action.
ArthuroftheBritons\\n[quote]The cavalry seems to be armoured with mail, perhaps a Burgh Castle style helmet, maybe some scale armour, and small shield. The poem also implies that the four-sided spear was used along with javelins and a spatha style longsword.
I wonder how you can deduce that from the poem, even more so because you are only using an osprey book which only generally discusses this subject. This is where you are rambling.
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - ArthuroftheBritons - 02-17-2010
Well like I said I was looking at a translation of the poem itself while writing and there is reference to the four-sided spear in the poem as well as a mention of mail. The swords were also mentioned along with shields while the helmets and scale armour bits were my own inference as to what would complete this ensemble of equipment. I also said that I didn't know much about the Companion Cavalry, and you know, a lot of this sounds a lot better in my head than on the screen. :lol:
Perhaps the Scholae Palatinae shown in the game Brabarian Invasion are a better comparison. But at least we've made advances, now we have eye-witness accounts of Sub-Roman British cavalry which actually fit the specifications of "heavy cavalry", and more importantly, is actually reliable! All right, weapons check. Contos, out the window. Longsword, without a doubt. Javelins, pretty much any shape and size. Four-Sided spear, debateable but destructive. Hmm... not a bad ensemble, doesn't fit with Melcor's ideas (thank goodness!) or the Romances (Perfect!) but it is certainly realistic. As for armour we have mail, paded leather jerkins, a small shield, and maybe just a dash of scale armour. Also perfect for the circumstances. Agraes, I'll need your help for this one, with this sort of equipment could the cavalry preform the functions your Breton cavalry does and still fight hand to hand with infantry? Also does nyone have a lead with Y Gododdin's shaggy white ponies? With that final bit of information we might get somewhere definitive and end all argument once and for all! (Well, one can hope) and then move on to details like numbers, tactics, and location. How exciting is that!
Re: Sub-Roman Britain Cavalry - Carvettia - 02-17-2010
Quote:Also does nyone have a lead with Y Gododdin's shaggy white ponies?I doubt you'll find anything concrete, since there wasn't any concept of breeds (ie, pedigreed stock and closed stud books) until well into modern times - 18th and 19th C.
There are no modern British breeds that are exclusively grey although all but the Exmoor include grey in their "colour range" (and even the Exmoor had some greys in the 1930s). Jervaulx Abbey Rolls, much much later than Y Goddoddin, list a larger number of "white" or "grey" animals than any other. I have no idea why, and am sceptical of some of the theories that are put forward - besides them being clean out of this period.
Why do you need to know?