Sub-Roman Britain (Cavalry etc)

[Robert Vermaat]

First, because the Sarmatians used stirrups, unknown to older Roman usage, they and their successors would have fought more effectively from horseback than Roman cavalry who often moved mounted but dismounted to fight.
Second, because the Celts already shod their horses, later Sub-Roman Britons could have taken advantage of the network of Roman roads in Britannia as unshod horses could not. As a result, sub-Roman cavalry could have ranged far and wide over the island, as attested to by the dispersal of Arthur’s twelve victories recorded in the Tenth Century Annales Cambriae.

Hi Ron,

Well, the second point has already been answered. Cavalry did not ride on the road but along it, as I heard the infantry did as well – the Roman roads mainly facilitate transport.

As to the first point, I must vehemently deny that. First of all, Roman cavalry did not dismount to fight. I don’t know where you found that but it’s absolutely untrue. It was to the contrary a Germanic thing, ride to battle but fight on foot.
Sarmatians are also not known to have used stirrups. The earliest evidence we have of their use is post-Roman. However, leather may well have been used during Roman times and before, but just as a stabilising aid. Besides, I have heard that stirrups don’t make a whole lot of difference.

Mobility of cavalry is only superior on the battlefield. Horses don’t walk faster than men over long distances – after the 3rd day the infantry catches up and moves ahead. It’s extremely important to have cavalry, but it does not much improve your strategic position outside a small area.

As an aside:
Can we forget about these Sarmatians? Some from Pannonia (Pannolonia?) were introduced into Britain during the 2nd century (but we don’t know where) and one unit is still found in Lancashire - Ribchester during the 4th, but to claim the last as descendants is already guessing. These Sarmatians have began to add a new myth to the Arthurian Cycle, and suddenly everybody sees Sarmatian Knights everywhere.
There was no Sarmatian cavalry present in post-Roman Britain that we have any evidence of. I have discussed this issue at length with the author of this theory, but she could never make a believable point that somehow these Sarmatians escaped the usual process of foreign groups inside the Roman empire. There are 300400 years between the move of Sarmatians to Britain and the ‘Age of Arthur’. All other groups assimilated, including Sarmatians and other peoples we know of. Why would these British Sarmatians remain unchanged?

Stilicho can’t have sent a second rescue in 418 AD, he was dead by August 22, 408.