Roman use of the Contus

[Urselius]

There are a number of difficulties with the way Roman cavalry are percieved, in my opinion. Contus-armed cavalry - and there were [i]contarii[/i] as well as cataphractarii and clibanarii in the later Roman army - were specialised shock cavalry, but this does not mean that cavalry not armed with the contus were incapable of shock action.

The 'standard' Roman cavalryman of both the Pricipate and Dominate might have been armed with javelins, but he was also armed with a hasta and had a shield and armour. Indeed most contemporary images of Roman cavalry show a spear being wielded in a thrusting manner, not a javelin being thrown.The hasta does not differ greatly in size or capability from the lances wielded by the Norman knights at Hastings, who did not couch their lances; and depictions show these knights using overarm thrusts much as most depictions of Roman cavalry do.

The main difference between contus-armed cavalry and 'standard' Roman cavalry is one of specialisation. The standard Roman cavalryman could do patrol and screening work, in battle he could skirmish or engage in close or shock combat with the hasta, he was a flexible soldier. The contus armed cavalryman could only do one thing, battlefield shock action; he was better at this than the 'standard' cavalryman, but he could not do the other duties.