Cataphract, Clibanarii, whatever, against Infantry

[Aulus Perrinius]

Yes I can and in all of these battles the cavalry were triumphant over solid infantry (Nor were the infantry poor quality)

Chaerona Alexanders Cavalry took out solid infantry in a frontal charge and smashed them.

An Unnamed Battle where Carolingian Heavy Horse went comepletely through a solid Viking shield wall breaking them.

Ravenna three climatic frontal charges against solid Landskchnecht and Spanish Pikes and the heavy horse went right through the pike square.

Marignano Thirty five frontal charges home against solid swiss infantry

Ceresole three deciding charges on their own against solid infantry punching right through them.

Dreux. The heavy horse made several frontal charges on their own against solid swiss pikemen they dealt out heavy casualties to the swiss and went right through the pike square would have broken them except the Swiss pikes were rescued by: Guess what? A Charge of Heavy Horse.

KIlchusny The Husaria charged through a fence and hit a solid pike square . . . Eleven times on the eleventh charge they broke the Russian infantry.

Kircholm The Husaria charged home against solid infantry on their own and broke them

Elyau French Lancers took on solid infantry in a deciding charge on their own and went right through them.

Dresden The French Lancers Hit Solid infantry in a frontal charge on their own and went right through them.

Omdurman The 21st Lancers broke solid infantry on their own in a frontal charge.

Was that what you had in mind? The idea that John Keegan touts about horses not charging home against solid infantry is nonsense.

[M. Demetrius]

Well, before you draw swords and subsequently, blood, how many battles where the infantry successfully defended against cavalry? And be sure to keep the tone even, not confrontational, please. 8)

[marka]

Yes I can and in all of these battles the cavalry were triumphant over solid infantry (Nor were the infantry poor quality)




Was that what you had in mind? The idea that John Keegan touts about horses not charging home against solid infantry is nonsense.

i wasn't being confrontational merely curious-i don't have any pet theories.
I would love to see a reenactment trial of this whatever the results.
firstly horses are easily spooked.
notice the reference to repeated charges-i would suggest that the successful charge was made when the infantry were already weary,may be unsupported and may well have been running away.
horses running straight into pikes???
battles in no particular order

civitate 1053 mercenary infantry stood up to normans (after the rest of the army had fled)until they were surrounded.
hastings 1066 anglo saxon infantry stood up to repeated cavalry attacks until the death of their leader
argentorum 357? allamanni infantry and dismounted cavalry repulsed and routed roman cataphracts
tours 732 frankish infantry succesfully held off arab cavalry
mursa 351 roman infantry held off cavalry
tigris&maragha 363 roman infantry repulsed persian cataphracts
taginae 552 byzantine infantry&dismounted cavalry repulsed gothic horse
taurus 39bc
pharsalus 48bc
callinacum ? byzantine infantry held off persian cavalry
etc etc

concerning the napoleonic ones cavalry could rarely break squares and some of their sucesses seem to be against troops in line formation facing away from them as far as i know the french failed to break british squares at waterloo.

[Aulus Perrinius]

I know you're not being confrontational and I'm sorry if I came across that way it was never my intention. Warhorses aren't easily spooked and no the infantry were not weary they were solid and yes they were pikes and yes the horses did charge home against them and nor were the troops disordered.

Ravenna They hit them on the first charge and though, the pikemen reformed, heavy horse hit them again and went through, infantry reform, heavy horse hit them again and then the pikemen seeing the writing on the wall and the rest of the army coming surrender to the heavy horse (I can only imagine the how devestated the pike square would have been after the french slammed through them nor were the pikes running away and they had support

Ceresole same pattern as Ravenna they break them on the third and final charge.

Marignano the heavy horse charged home againt swiss pikemen and while the the swiss were occupied the french artillery played bowling balls with them the swiss recognizing what would happen to them if they kept this up left the field in good order but with a large percentage of their original force dead on the field.

Dreux the Hugenout heavy horse hit the solid swiss pikes and carve their way through they deal tremoundous damage to the swiss and would have broken except the swiss were saved by a charge of friendly heavy horse

Kircholm the poles hit the first line of swedish pikes (which were solid BTW) and break them

Kilchusny the Husaria charge through a fence and hit enemy pikemen the reson why it took the eleven charges to break the russians was because they charged through a fence and across a field and they didn't have any lances.

Omdurman

Elyau the french lancers carve their way through a solid block of infantry

Dresden the lancers do it again

The 21st Lancers hit solid infantry formed in block . . . And broke them

A note about hastings, the norman heavy horse had to charged up a hill thus losing most of their power.

[Justin of the New Yorkii]

Chaerona Alexanders Cavalry took out solid infantry in a frontal charge and smashed them.

Do we have any other sources other than Diodorus of Sicily that record this? I don't know, it could have happened, but it always sounded fanciful to me.

"Alexander hit the phalanx head-on and crushed it" according to a historian who wrote a few centuries after the fact sounds to me like a "George Washington cut down the cherry tree"-type of story.

[Aulus Perrinius]

Chaerona Alexanders Cavalry took out solid infantry in a frontal charge and smashed them.

Do we have any other sources other than Diodorus of Sicily that record this? I don't know, it could have happened, but it always sounded fanciful to me.

"Alexander hit the phalanx head-on and crushed it" according to a historian who wrote a few centuries after the fact sounds to me like a "George Washington cut down the cherry tree"-type of story.

I see no reason why it should be thought of as a myth it seems perectly reasonable to me

[Justin of the New Yorkii]

I see no reason why it should be thought of as a myth it seems perectly reasonable to me

Cavalry charging straight-ahead at the center of a phalanx of picked hoplites and utterly destroying them?

How many other examples do we have of a hoplite phalanx getting smashed by a straight-ahead horse charge at the center of the formation?

Don't get me wrong, I believe that Alexander's cavalry probably played a big role at Chaeronea, but I don't think they charged directly into the center of a firmly positioned phalanx as Diodorus described. Perhaps, but if so I'd like to hear it from another source.

[marka]

Chaerona Alexanders Cavalry took out solid infantry in a frontal charge and smashed them.

i read the account alexander took them in the flank when a gap opened up in the line.

franks breaking viking infantry i think this is saucourt and even the frankish sources maintain the vikings withdrew in good order from the battlefield.

also by my admittedly limited maths a charging cavalryman would face four spears or pikes at least from the opposing infantry.

[marka]

Yes I can and in all of these battles the cavalry were triumphant over solid infantry (Nor were the infantry poor quality)




Dreux. The heavy horse made several frontal charges on their own against solid swiss pikemen they dealt out heavy casualties to the swiss and went right through the pike square would have broken them except the Swiss pikes were rescued by: Guess what? A Charge of Heavy Horse.


Elyau French Lancers took on solid infantry in a deciding charge on their own and went right through them.

Dresden The French Lancers Hit Solid infantry in a frontal charge on their own and went right through them.

Omdurman The 21st Lancers broke solid infantry on their own in a frontal charge.

dreux you might want to read the accounts again
elyau i always read this as the charge went between infantry squares
omdurman don't dispute this one although they lost a lot of horses

phlanxes were always vulnerable to flank or rear attcks due to the redeployment time

[M. Demetrius]

Somehow, this whole conversation reminds me of another Clibanarius who used to come to a conclusion, then bring a question that sounded genuinely curious, then drum that conclusion over and over, in spite of evidence to contradict it. That fellow usually was pretty closed-minded about things. Wonder what ever happened to him? :|

[marka]

a further point if i may
assuming our cavalryman has charged home frontally once involved in a melee against say legionaries 6-8 ranks deep he would be facing three or four legionaries in close proximity and would be at a distinct disadvantage for several reasons.
assuming he disposed of these....he would have a further eight to twelve...then he would meet the second line.

against spearmen he would face four or five spears from the front rank alone

not to mention the amount of missiles that would be thrown at him whilst charging or having to avoid wounded or dead horses...caltrops and any other barriers.

most of the sources talking about a cavalry victory are talking about a cavalry force attacking the rear or flank of the infantry force while this was hard pressed to the front ie alesia,pharsalus or adrianople.a couple are talking about a group of infantry fighting on (after everybody else has fled) unitl they are surrounded.In some cases the surrounded infantry were either allowed to leave or they asked terms of surrender.

[Aulus Perrinius]

Yes I can and in all of these battles the cavalry were triumphant over solid infantry (Nor were the infantry poor quality)




Dreux. The heavy horse made several frontal charges on their own against solid swiss pikemen they dealt out heavy casualties to the swiss and went right through the pike square would have broken them except the Swiss pikes were rescued by: Guess what? A Charge of Heavy Horse.


Elyau French Lancers took on solid infantry in a deciding charge on their own and went right through them.

Dresden The French Lancers Hit Solid infantry in a frontal charge on their own and went right through them.

Omdurman The 21st Lancers broke solid infantry on their own in a frontal charge.

dreux you might want to read the accounts again
elyau i always read this as the charge went between infantry squares
omdurman don't dispute this one although they lost a lot of horses

phlanxes were always vulnerable to flank or rear attcks due to the redeployment time

i read the account alexander took them in the flank when a gap opened up in the line.

franks breaking viking infantry i think this is saucourt and even the frankish sources maintain the vikings withdrew in good order from the battlefield.

also by my admittedly limited maths a charging cavalryman would face four spears or pikes at least from the opposing infantry.

I have no problem with the Vikings leaving in good order, my point was that the Franks beat them.

Dreux as far as I know that's what happened the Gendarmes pulled it off, granted they lost to the Catholic Heavy Horse and Granted the Swiss survived and didn't break amazing courage and stubborness was displayed on both sides.

Elyau, well okay then although I'm not sure what a charge between squares would do. If you have info please tell me.

Grnated they did lose a lot of horses at Omdurman . . . But still.

As for Chaerona it did take several repeated charges against the Thebans to finally break them.

Somehow, this whole conversation reminds me of another Clibanarius who used to come to a conclusion, then bring a question that sounded genuinely curious, then drum that conclusion over and over, in spite of evidence to contradict it. That fellow usually was pretty closed-minded about things. Wonder what ever happened to him? :|

What's that supposed the mean? I am curious about battles where Cataphracts fought infantry (You read my posts and I never denied any of the battles where infantry fought them off) nor am I being close minded that's what happened at those battles.

As for Spearmen VS Cavalry

Well the cavalryman would be facing several pikes, so assuming that one rank is kneeling so that's around the pikes, the last ranks would have their pointing up IIRC, so the cavalrymans lance takes out the first rank, which seems believable, now there are still two ranks left okay then, well if the horse armoured then the first rank of spears that hit the armour will be diverted to the side wrenching their wielder along with them, or the shaft will break, the third rank, well that's the monkey wrench, the heavy horse might take out or neutralize the first rank and if they're really good take out the second, but the assuming the third ranks holds its ground then that's a lot of rider who take a point through the gap in their helm or or knocked off or the horses are held and the charged is stopped. If the cavalry is really, really good and lucky they might manage to take out or neutralize the third and then you have a bunch of running horses charging through a mass of tightly packed dudes and the horses are to close for the remaining ranks to get their spears in position and so the horses go out the other side. Assuming the heavy horse don't wheel and attack the infantry from the rear and the infantry reform then you have what I believe is a draw. IMO charging home isn't that difficult the real problem is breaking the enemy infantry.

BTW we're getting off topic here.

So so far all the battles where cataphracts fought solid infantry, the infantry won.

[Sean Manning]

There does seem to be a lot of sweeping generalizations whenever this topic comes up. People also seem to bring up examples from many different periods, even though its likelt that the relationship between different types of troops in different cultures at different times varied.

Another datapoint is the battle of Magnesia in 190 BCE. That involved Seleucid cataphracts charging a Roman line from the front and driving a legion back into its camp in disorder. In his book on the Seleucid army Bezallel bar Kochva argues that the legion which was driven back was one of citizens, not socii as Livy suggests.

[marka]

BTW we're getting off topic here.

err not quite off topic.....the topic was cataphracts etc performance against infantry
attacking frontally....
you're assuming that each horse will opposed by just one infantryman in the front rank...i would say two,if the front rank is kneeling with spears grounded that brings the second rank into play which makes four.As you say the third ranks could also could into play and you've still got three to five ranks to go and then the second line or reserves.
you're also assuming the infantry don't spread caltrops,dig ditches etc.
as soon as one horse is killed this is an additional obstacle.
Of course once the charge stalls the advantage goes to the infantryman.

at some napoleonic battles the infantry formed in battalion squares with gaps between each for ease of movement but this is off topic.
a huge corps or legion sized square would only be possible in open country and would be more cumbersome.
scipio formed cohort squares against elephants at zama i think

[marka]

re eylau look at the date and the weather conditions as well.