How Effective were Spears Against Cavalry?

[Nathan Ross]

Of all soldiers (including rear-area camp servants, etc.), or of soldiers involved in combat?

I think he was referring solely to those killed in combat, but I haven't read Sorokin's work, just seen it quoted here and there, so couldn't be too sure.

Anyway, his point is that direct battle casualties in pre-modern conflicts were relatively few, but that the percentage increases enormously with the arrival of gunpowder weaponry. By the mid 20th century casualty rates of 40% or greater were not unusual; your suggestions about rates of death and wounding in the American Civil War and the two world wars would bear this out.

At the risk of further generalising, I would suggest that the majority of fatalities in ancient battles appear to have occurred during routs, after one side or the other broke and tried to flee. Once battle had commenced, therefore, a soldier would actually be safer if he held his position in formation - the principle of self preservation was actually allied to discipline in these circumstances.

To pull this back somewhat towards the theme, therefore, I would say that there was little motivation for soldiers (whether cavalry or otherwise) to engage in reckless and potentially suicidal attacks against enemy formations. That this sometimes happened is undeniable, but to suggest that it was routine or expected would be to overestimate the exceptional courage of the few and the relative caution of the many.