06-22-2013, 02:21 PM
It depends on the time period you are asking about, because as you've seen the Later Empire actually had quite good cavalry. But since you mention Parthians I assume you are speaking to Republican or Early Empire Rome.
To my understanding the lack of Roman cavalry in the early to mid Republican era was similar to why the Greeks didn't use much cavalry either, lack of ready access to large numbers of horses and topography. Horses were something owned only by the wealthy elite, so the numbers of experienced horse riders to draw on would be fairly low, and the mountainous/hilly terrain of Italy was less than ideal for large cavalry formations. Looking at were primarily cavalry based militaries developed and is places like the Steppe, Arabia, or Mongolia, places with huge amounts of flat, open land. So the Romans, like the Greeks, faced smaller fields of battle and relied on disciplined heavy infantry as the core of their army, with cavalry playing a support role.
As the influence of Rome spread and their lack of cavalry became a problem, they made strides to improve their cavalry by recruiting peoples who were better at horsemanship than the Romans were. So Roman legions could have fairly good cavalry, it just varied depending on where they had gotten their auxiliary cavalry from. Julius Ceaser's gaulic cavalry was very effective and likely a reason why he was so often able to defeat much larger armies.
To my understanding the lack of Roman cavalry in the early to mid Republican era was similar to why the Greeks didn't use much cavalry either, lack of ready access to large numbers of horses and topography. Horses were something owned only by the wealthy elite, so the numbers of experienced horse riders to draw on would be fairly low, and the mountainous/hilly terrain of Italy was less than ideal for large cavalry formations. Looking at were primarily cavalry based militaries developed and is places like the Steppe, Arabia, or Mongolia, places with huge amounts of flat, open land. So the Romans, like the Greeks, faced smaller fields of battle and relied on disciplined heavy infantry as the core of their army, with cavalry playing a support role.
As the influence of Rome spread and their lack of cavalry became a problem, they made strides to improve their cavalry by recruiting peoples who were better at horsemanship than the Romans were. So Roman legions could have fairly good cavalry, it just varied depending on where they had gotten their auxiliary cavalry from. Julius Ceaser's gaulic cavalry was very effective and likely a reason why he was so often able to defeat much larger armies.
Tom
{Insert Well Known Idiom Here}
{Insert Well Known Idiom Here}
