04-23-2013, 07:39 AM
How does the army of like Trajan era compare to the Late Roman army/Byzantine(both East and West)
Which was better on the battlefield? Which tactics were better?
Heres what I know-The Trajan type army was focused on Heavy infantry as its striking force. Those guys had big shields and used the Gladius for stabbing in formation. They carried the Pilum to soften ranks or as a spear against horsemen. They had small detatchment of Auxilia cavalry to guard the flanks and archers from Crete and Syria
Late Roman army-The infantry has been weakened their Lorica segmentata was no longer used. They are no longer in ridgid formation with their smaller shields, Spatha longsword and weaker javelins but have better cavalry like Cataphracts plus the East fielded more archers.
Which army was more practical?
Which was better on the battlefield? Which tactics were better?
Heres what I know-The Trajan type army was focused on Heavy infantry as its striking force. Those guys had big shields and used the Gladius for stabbing in formation. They carried the Pilum to soften ranks or as a spear against horsemen. They had small detatchment of Auxilia cavalry to guard the flanks and archers from Crete and Syria
Late Roman army-The infantry has been weakened their Lorica segmentata was no longer used. They are no longer in ridgid formation with their smaller shields, Spatha longsword and weaker javelins but have better cavalry like Cataphracts plus the East fielded more archers.
Which army was more practical?
