Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Cavalry as the decisive element in battle
#16
We can specifically address specific usage of cavalry by Romans of any single period, but you should clarify it better since after reading your OP I really thought your point was more general. You mentioned Greek warfare too as well as medieval times and then you compared what happened when foot soldiers fought men on horses. If you would like to make the discussion more specific please do so.

If my memory serves me well, JC's infantry did not defeat Pompey's cavalry by standing firm, they routed it by charging it after having taken specific orders to do so. It was a stratagem devised to specifically counter the damaging effects of cavalry inferiority that JC feared.

Anyways, the term "decisive element" can be very misleading. Many things can become decisive elements if not taken care of properly and provisioned for by the commanders. Would you rather discuss the importance of cavalry in the Roman frame of battle tactics of a specific period? Or maybe the ability of cavalry to effectively charge/damage/rout infantry?
Macedon
MODERATOR
Forum rules
George C. K.
῾Ηρακλῆος γὰρ ἀνικήτου γένος ἐστέ
Reply
#17
Thank you for the suggestion Macedon! My initial point was to discuss the usage of cavalry in pitched battles, and as the posts continued i clarified it by using the example of Pharsalus. I mentioned that i went through the sources and found no example as to a pitched battle od Pharsalus. As for the medieval times, i meant to mention it just to give an example of difference from ancient times.

Yes, Caesar devised that strategem specifically to counter the damaging effects of Pompey's cavalry. He devised it so his 6 cohorts would stand in line and not throw their javelins but use their spears and in a firm line point them and attack the faces of cavalrymen. When they fled (because the young men riding horses were afraid of scars) what was left of Caesar's cavalry was joined with these 6 cohorts. Then they were deployed in full scale battle and routed Pompey's left wing. That was the initial plan which ended happily for Caesar.

Since i wanted to talk about pitched battles i think that the importance of cavalry in the Roman frame of battle tactics of, let's say, republican era is better than the ability of cavalry to rout infantry. Maybe also because i always prefered republican times than principate. Smile
It is not these well-fed long-haired men that I fear, but the pale and the hungry-looking.
Fedja.
Reply
#18
Carrhae would be the best example, I think, of cavalry tactics against infantry, and a good illustration of the combined use of light and heavy cavalry - the Parthian horse archers, keeping out of range of the Roman missiles, kept up a steady fire against the Roman infantry, causing them to bunch together for protection and so buckling their line. These gaps or weak spots in the Roman line were then attacked by small bodies of heavy cataphracts, acting more like wedges or small columns, I would think, than the charging wall of popular imagination. The cataphracts were driven off, but the steady attrition wore the Romans down and led to their defeat.

In 38BC, Roman general Ventidius again faced the Parthian cavalry - this time he positioned his men at the top of a slope, which either meant the horse archers were unable to shoot effectively (the source for this, Frontinus, is a bit vague), or made it appear that the Romans were already in disarray. Either way, an uphill charge by the Parthian cavalry was repelled by a downhill counter-charge by the Roman infantry, resulting in the total destruction of the Parthians.

An example of a battle apparently entirely fought by cavalry occurs in Zosimus' description of the Palmyran campaign of Aurelian:

Quote:...observing that the Palmyrene cavalry placed great confidence in their armour, which was very strong and secure, and that they were much better horsemen than his soldiers, he [Aurelian] planted his infantry by themselves on the other side the Orontes. He charged his cavalry not to engage immediately with the vigourous cavalry of the Palmyrenians, but to wait for their attack, and then, pretending to fly, to continue so doing until they had wearied both the men and their horses through excess of heat and the weight of their armour; so that they could pursue them no longer. This project succeeded, and as soon as the cavalry of the emperor saw their enemy tired, and that their horses were scarcely able to stand under them, or themselves to move, they drew up the reins of their horses, and, wheeling round, charged them, and trod them under foot as they fell from their horses. By which means the slaugther was promiscuous, some falling by the sword, and others by their own and the enemies' horses. After this defeat, the remains of the enemy fled into Antioch...
Zosimus - Historia Nova I

It's unclear quite what the Palmyrene cavalry thought they were doing here - they were perhaps trying to outflank the infantry, but the latter were on the far side of a river...

It's possible this is the same battle as the second clash at Emesa described by Zosimus - the dubious Historia Augusta gives only one major confrontation. In any case, in this second example the previous plan seems to go awry:

Quote:At the commencement of the engagement, the Roman cavalry receded, lest the Palmyrenes, who exceeded them in number, and were better horsemen, should by some stratagem surround the Roman army. But the Palmyrene cavalry pursued them so fiercely, though their ranks were broken, that the event was quite contrary to the expectation of the Roman cavalry. For they were pursued by an enemy much their superior in strength, and therefore most of them fell. The foot had to bear the brunt of the action. Observing that the Palmyrenes had broken their ranks when the horse commenced their pursuit, they wheeled about, and attacked them while they were scattered and out of order. Upon which many were killed, because the one side fought with the usual weapons, while those of Palestine brought clubs and staves against coats of mail made of iron and brass. The Palmyrenes therefore ran away with the utmost precipitation, and in their flight trod each other to pieces, as if the enemy did not make sufficient slaughter; the field was filled with dead men and horses...
Zosimus - Historia Nova I

In this case, the Palmyrenes were definitely trying an outflanking movement against the infantry. The retreat of the Roman cavalry might have been feigned, as before, with the intention of drawing off the Palmyrene horse and allowing the infantry to manoeuvre against them - the wheeling of the Roman infantry line presumably brought them into contact with the open flank of the Palmyrene cavalry advance: a rare case of infantry outflanking cavalry, perhaps?
Nathan Ross
Reply
#19
Very interesting comments ! but remember Hannibal, he defeated roman infantry many times, using his cavalry at a particular moment with sophisticated strategy (the famous battle of Cannes ).
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Location of Caesar's decisive battle against Cassivellaunus tikeshe 2 1,477 01-21-2017, 10:20 PM
Last Post: tikeshe
  Did Roman cavalry wear face-masks in battle? mcbishop 89 26,212 04-23-2015, 08:42 AM
Last Post: PhilusEstilius
  Decisive Battles Flavivs Aetivs 28 4,161 03-20-2014, 07:54 PM
Last Post: Sardaukar

Forum Jump: