02-26-2013, 12:39 AM
It is interesting reading Ammianus' account of Argentoratum here. If you read the English alongside the Latin here you will see that he refers to both cataphracts and clibanarii as occupying the right wing of the Roman battle-line. The Allemani assemble cavalry against them but use scattered light infantry and skirmishers among them to unhorse and and defeat the Roman mailed heavy cavalry. Ammianus has the barbarians realise that no matter how skilful are their cavalry they would be unable to enagage succesfully a cataphract opponent due to the encompassing heavy amour.
This is a tactic used both in fiction (you knew I was going to bring up the Aethiopica, right?) and history (Crassus, I believe, as well as Constantine). Ammianus is specific in allowing the Allemani to recognise that against Germanic mailed cavalry, cataphracts and clibanarii would triumph. He allows a certain tactical realisation and also a counter-strategy to neutralise that advantage.
section 22, Book 16:
For they realised that one of their warriors on horseback, no matter how skilful, in meeting one of our cavalry in coat-of‑mail, must hold bridle and shield in one hand and brandish his spear with the other, and would thus be able to do no harm to a soldier hidden in iron armour; whereas the infantry soldier in the very hottest of the fight, when nothing is apt to be guarded against except what is straight before one, can creep about low and unseen, and by piercing a horse's side throw its unsuspecting rider headlong, whereupon he can be slain with little trouble. 23 Having made this arrangement, they provided their right flank with secret and puzzling ambuscades. Now all these warlike and savage tribes were led by Chonodomarius and Serapio, kings higher than all the rest in authority.
The part 'cavalry in coat of mail' in the Latin is 'clibanario'.
The Roman heavy cavalry collapse suddenly as follows:
Now that had happened for the reason that while the order of their lines was being re-established, the cavalry in coat-of‑mail, seeing their leader slightly wounded and one of their companions slipping over the neck of his horse, which had collapsed under the weight of his armour, scattered in whatever direction they could; the cavalry would have caused complete confusion by trampling the infantry underfoot, had not the latter, who were packed close together and intertwined one with the other, held their ground without stirring. So, when Caesar had seen from a distance that the cavalry were looking for nothing except safety in flight, he spurred on his horse and held them back like a kind of barrier.
Section, 38, Book 16. Here the part 'cavalry in coat of mail' is now rendered 'cataphracti' in Latin.
I believe Renatus has looked at whether the collapsing weight issue is the horse or rider collapsing? In other words, is the rider collapsing under the weight of his armour or has the horse collapsed under the weight of its armour? But I might be confusing this thread with the similar one over at the IB forums of Total War?
This is a tactic used both in fiction (you knew I was going to bring up the Aethiopica, right?) and history (Crassus, I believe, as well as Constantine). Ammianus is specific in allowing the Allemani to recognise that against Germanic mailed cavalry, cataphracts and clibanarii would triumph. He allows a certain tactical realisation and also a counter-strategy to neutralise that advantage.
section 22, Book 16:
For they realised that one of their warriors on horseback, no matter how skilful, in meeting one of our cavalry in coat-of‑mail, must hold bridle and shield in one hand and brandish his spear with the other, and would thus be able to do no harm to a soldier hidden in iron armour; whereas the infantry soldier in the very hottest of the fight, when nothing is apt to be guarded against except what is straight before one, can creep about low and unseen, and by piercing a horse's side throw its unsuspecting rider headlong, whereupon he can be slain with little trouble. 23 Having made this arrangement, they provided their right flank with secret and puzzling ambuscades. Now all these warlike and savage tribes were led by Chonodomarius and Serapio, kings higher than all the rest in authority.
The part 'cavalry in coat of mail' in the Latin is 'clibanario'.
The Roman heavy cavalry collapse suddenly as follows:
Now that had happened for the reason that while the order of their lines was being re-established, the cavalry in coat-of‑mail, seeing their leader slightly wounded and one of their companions slipping over the neck of his horse, which had collapsed under the weight of his armour, scattered in whatever direction they could; the cavalry would have caused complete confusion by trampling the infantry underfoot, had not the latter, who were packed close together and intertwined one with the other, held their ground without stirring. So, when Caesar had seen from a distance that the cavalry were looking for nothing except safety in flight, he spurred on his horse and held them back like a kind of barrier.
Section, 38, Book 16. Here the part 'cavalry in coat of mail' is now rendered 'cataphracti' in Latin.
I believe Renatus has looked at whether the collapsing weight issue is the horse or rider collapsing? In other words, is the rider collapsing under the weight of his armour or has the horse collapsed under the weight of its armour? But I might be confusing this thread with the similar one over at the IB forums of Total War?
Francis Hagan
The Barcarii
The Barcarii
