Why did the Roman army base on infantry?

[Michael Kerr]

Mark Hygate wrote:

Whilst I certainly won't disagree, I would note that horses bred and selected for racing (with or without chariots indeed), tend to have different prime characteristics to those more suitable for the average cavalryman. The very best racers often tend to be highly strung, which is not a useful trait in combat.

I agree with what you say so I should have explained myself better. With the importance of games and racing in not only Rome but most of the major cities of the empire, (keeping the masses happy) was always a prime motivation for successive emporers so there would be more monetary incentive for breeders and horse traders to breed and find racing horses rather than horses for the military. As you pointed out the logistical needs of the army was a high priority so mules would be important. (I think early on in his career Vespasian had to resort to mule trading to rebuild his fortune.) That's why I think it was cheaper for them to use Auxiliary cavalry. The Han empire in China also had problems with nomadic tribes and after years of unsuccessful bribing of the tribes they realised that the situation required a military solution and instigated a horse breeding program by acquiring horses (Heavenly Horses) by treaty or force to train a cavalry force who could at least hold their own against the tribes. They both had similar problems but approached them differently.

Regards
Michael
Kerr