Cavalry and chariots against infantry

[Domen]

First of all, Ammianus doesn't say the Gothic cavalry were doing the trampling.

He also doesn't say the Gothic infantry were doing the trampling...

He uses the words "assailants" and "barbarians" - which don't tell us what type of troops it was.

But from the analysis of the context and the meaning of what he writes, it becomes obvious that it was either cavalry or both of them - cavalry mixed with infantry. Certainly not just infantry.

And when he writes, that "barbarians trampled down horse and man" - it is obvious that he speaks about cavalry, because men would not be able to trample down horses, lol (if you don't believe - then please find some adult horse that could be used as a battle horse and then try to trample down it!).

BTW - according to: http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/trample+down

"Trample down = to crush down someone or something with the feet."

How do you imagine a man "crushing down a horse with his feet" possible?!

OTOH - a horse "crushing down a man (or even another horse) with its feet" is possible.

Then Ammianus writes about pursuit (which is typically a job of cavalry - and was at Adrianople, where the Romans lost 2/3 of their army killed, not including wounded survivors - and vast majority of survivors were Roman cavalry... - infantry is too slow to carry out such an efficient pursuit). And he mentions the fact that some of the Romans were "buried beneath the mere weight of their assailants". A man has definitely not enough speed and not enough of the mere weight to "bury" another man "beneath" him... Only a horse (or a chariot, or an elephant, or another large animal) can do this.

Then he writes that "our soldiers also, showing extreme contempt of falling in the fight, received their death-blows, yet struck down their assailants" - so the Roman infantry continued to struggle and inflicted many casualties. And then he concludes (after writing that the field was full of killed and wounded men), that: "also mounds of fallen horses filled the plains with corpses" - and he certainly speaks not only about Roman horses, but also about Gothic horses - because it was the Gothic army which had superiority in cavalry in this battle (they really had enough to "fill the plains with mounds of fallen horses corpses"). On the other hand the Roman cavalry apparently did not suffer too heavy losses in this battle, because it fled from the battlefield rather than fighting to the last drop of blood (Ammianus writes: "being deserted by the rest of the [Roman] cavalry, (...) [Roman] foot-soldiers thus stood unprotected" - and only after this statement he describes the final part of the battle, in which apparently mostly Roman infantry fought, because overwhelming majority of the Roman cavalry had already escaped before).

Interpretation, that he speaks about Gothic infantry trampling Roman men and horses (sic!) is simply stupid... Especially that by that time most of the Roman cavalry already fled from the field.

Regarding Gothic losses at Adrianople - I have seen estimations that they lost 1/4 of initial strength.

So the battle was bloody for both sides (the excerpt about lots of dead horses confirms this).

==============================================

I get the impression that the Goths have surrounded the Romans, and are harassing the Romans with arrows and javelins, and the Romans are launching uncoordinated charges to try to hit back at the Goths. Gradually, the Romans are whittled down, and are leaving their wounded to get trampled by the Gothic advance. I know this is only one impressionistic reconstruction.

Well - this "impression" is indeed totally unrelated to description by Ammianus. He writes that the Romans were squeezed by the Goths and had no space to even use their weapons.

And you claim that they were "launching charges to try to hit back at the Goths".

They were so crowded together that they could not even "pull out their swords or draw back their arms" and also that "in the press of ranks no room for retreat could be gained anywhere, and the increased crowding left no opportunity for escape", but you claim, that at the same time they were able to "launch uncoordinated charges". If due to increased crowding "no room for retreat could be gained anywhere", then also certainly no room for counter-charges could be gained anywhere.

Please note, that what you write - "surrounded and harrasing with arrows and javelins" - is not "the press of ranks". The "press of ranks" indicates that there was no space between the Goths and the Romans, but that the Goths were physically pushing or smashing into the Romans, who were so squeezed due to this pressure, that many of them could not even "pull out their swords or draw back their arms".

You need sufficient space and room to carry out counterattacks or charges.

Also the impression about only Roman wounded being trampled is faulty. Ammianus writes:

"were pursuing our men, in whose veins the blood was chilled with numb horror: some fell without knowing who struck them down, others were buried beneath the mere weight of their assailants"

So he writes that men were "buried beneath the weight of their assailants" while running away being chased - not while lying on the ground wounded. Some were struck by weapons, some trampled.

"Without knowing who struck them" also suggests cavalry (cavalry hits from above - unless you look upward, you don't see the face of a cavalryman, you can only see his horse and legs).

Of course it is possible that some of the wounded and already lying on the ground were also trampled (it is even clear - certainly if someone fell on the ground, he was getting trampled by horses). But - anyway - Ammianus writes about men who tried to run away getting chased and trampled while moving.

============================================================

Such a video as an example of what horses can do in battle (start watching from 5:50):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cxLxb4Bexs#t=5m50s

==========================================

Edit:

In a book about Adrianople, I found photo of such a sculpture from the Arch of Constantine in Rome:

According to the book, it shows the scene of Constantine's shock cavalry smashing Maxentius' heavy infantry (namely - the Praetorian Guard) in the battle of the Milvian Bridge (312 AD):

According to wikipedia, this particular fight took part on the northern side of the river:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_t...ian_Bridge

"Maxentius' Praetorian Guard seem to have made a stubborn stand on the northern bank of the river."



We can clearly see soldiers of the Praetorian Guard getting smashed and trampled down by horses.

===========================================

And such a comment regarding performance of Roman cavalry at Adrianople: