Gallic cavalry. . or German or any western cav. . help!

[L C Cinna]

thanks hoplite14gr interesting read.

[Treveri Gaul]

Hello.

Hungaryan or Hun cavalry attack metode interested Any More? Sorry They're not Western cavalry))

Salve the Gaul

[Felix]

One small qualifier about horses and groups of people:

Horses will not run into something they perceive as a solid mass. If the mass is not solid, horses may be coaxed into pushing their way in. Horses are used in modern crowd control, and they can push the crowd around because, in part, it is not a solid formation. Of course, they are not usually charging through it. However, when Napoleonic cavalry did catch infantry out of square formation, they could readily charge through and slaughter the infantrymen, even though the infantry were still in a crowd; the infantry were not settled into a solid looking square.

[L C Cinna]

thanks felix. can you give ma any sources please? would love to read more about that as I'm really interested in the use of cavalry

[Felix]

Check out the Battle of Hohenfriedenberg, where the Bayreuth Dragoons overthrew some 20 battalions of Austrians. Another famous case is the Battle of Albuera, where Polish lancers smashed 3 English battalions in a matter of minutes.

At Dettingen, the Maison du Roi charged several lines of British infantry. The first opened fire too soon, leaving men frantically trying to reload in a disorganized fashion as the cavalry moved in. The first three lines of infantry caved in; it was the fourth line that held its fire, moved up close and fired effective close range vollies that turned back the French cavalry.

[Robert]

Hi Felix,

In my previous post, you will find the same line of thought as in your comment. It is very important to realise it is the speed of the horse on the battlefield that makes the difference. Used at the flanks or even circling the drawn up enemy, they could really ruin the day of any "set battle" commander. Once a formation was shattered, they did ride through and mopped up the remains with swift and deadly action from horseback. Mind you, the examples you quote are of a much more recent time, although the use of cavalry as a rapid intervention force has stayed around a long time.

[Felix]

Agreed; these instances happen to be better documented since they are more recent incidents. As it happens, at Hohenfriedenberg the Austrians left a gap in their firing line which the Prussians were able to slip into; the Poles at Albuera approached the front of the English under cover of a cloudburst.

[L C Cinna]

Hi Felix,

In my previous post, you will find the same line of thought as in your comment. It is very important to realise it is the speed of the horse on the battlefield that makes the difference. Used at the flanks or even circling the drawn up enemy, they could really ruin the day of any "set battle" commander. Once a formation was shattered, they did ride through and mopped up the remains with swift and deadly action from horseback. Mind you, the examples you quote are of a much more recent time, although the use of cavalry as a rapid intervention force has stayed around a long time.

I agree but I think that even examples of more modern times can help us understand the way a cavalry attack worked much better as we have more evidence. I mean tactics and arms changed but not the horses mind

besides I think Napoleonic cavalry has much more in common with ancient medium cavalry and the way to use them than medieval heavies.

[Robert]

Well, at least we all pretty much agree that the uses stated by Matt are about it. Haven't found any additional data to suggest contrary.

[philsidnell]

For all of you interested in the role of cavalry in ancient warfare, may I recommend you read my book Warhorse: Cavalry in Ancient Warfare. The main thrust of the book is that cavalry were much more effective and widely used than is often appreciated, and were often decisive in battle where they often employed shock action. There's plenty in there on Greek, Macedonian and Roman cavalry, and a fair bit on key enemies such as the Celts, Germans, Carthaginians and Persians. I've tried to quote from the ancient sources as far as possible with lots of examples of cavalry in action. Hope you enjoy it and find it useful.

Phil

[Dan Diffendale]

Anything in it on Campanian cavalry?

[philsidnell]

Do you mean Campanian, from Campania in Italy? - a little; or Companions as in the Macedonian cavalry? - lots. But feel free to ask me any specific questions and I'll help as much as I can.

[Dan Diffendale]

From Campania...

Is there much evidence (well, I know there isn't much...) for "Tarentine" cavalry (maybe originally from Tarentum, but later generalized to a class), briefly dismounting to throw javelins before remounting? Or as to how common a practice this may have been?

[philsidnell]

This is pretty much an off the top of my head answer, with just my own book to hand for reference, but basically no. I can't think of any cavalry that routinely dismounted to fight with ranged weapons. Why would you? If you are light cavalry you want to stay mobile, not risk getting caught with your feet on the ground. Nearly all instances of cavalry dismounting in ancient battle occurred in close combat - nothing to do with lack of stirrups or any of that nonsense - usually when riders found themselves jammed in a tight mass and had lost their manouevrability, or were surrounded or about to be overwhelmed and wanted to make a stand [they could not guarantee their horses would not join a rout and carry them away in disgrace] or, particularly with early Roman cavalry, to set an example of steadfastness and solidarity to wavering infantry.

The Campanians you asked about were considered to be among the best in Italy. At the siege of Capua (in Campania) in 211 BC (I think) the besieging Romans generally had slightly the worse of all the cavalry skirmishes (not by much, Republican Roman cavalry does not deserve its bad press). The Romans redressed the balance by adopting a new tactic - they trained up some light infantry armed with bundles of javelins to hitch a ride behind each rider - when the Capuan cavalry attempted to close on them the signal was given and the infantry dismounted: According to Livy:

' The line of cavalry was transformed into a line of infantry, which immediately charged, hurling its javelins in rapid succession and with great force. A great number were flung all along the line against both horses and men, inflicting many casualties; but an even greater shock was caused by the strange and unexpected mode of attack. The enemy were badly shaken and the Roman cavalry [who had remianed mounted] at once followed up the first assault, pursuing them to the city gates with great slaughter'. Livy xxvi . 4


The Capuans would hardly have been so shocked by the sudden appearance of javelin-armed skirmishers from a body of horsemen if they themselve fought in this style. I'm sure, although this is where I will struggle to give you precise citations to support it - the Tarentine style of fighting was mounted hit and run attacks with the javelin, closing in for close combat if an enemy was sufficiently softened up or could be caught in flank or rear. In fact I'm pretty shore there was a cavalry manouevre called the Tarentine which was training for just this sort of thing, but I'll have to check that out. Could be in Arrian's 'Ars Tactica'. I'll get back to you on that.

Hope that made sense.


Phil Sidnell

[philsidnell]

Still haven't found the bit on a Tarentine cavalry exercise - perhaps I imagined that after all, but here is something from Arrian's Ars Tactica quoted in Ann Hyland, Training The Roman Cavalry from Arrian's Ars Tactica (Stroud, Sutton Publishing, 1993), p. 70. Arrian is defining different types of cavalry, having already covered the armoured heavy cavalry, he goes on to the light cavalry:


'The name of skirmishers is given to those who do not come to close quarters but discharge their weapons from a distance; and of these some use throwing-spears and others bows. Those who skirmish with throwing-spears are called Tarentines, and the others mounted bowmen. Of the Tarentines some skirmish only from a distance, keeping far off, or riding round the enemy in a circle, and those are the Tarentines proper. But others first discharge their weapons and then join battle with the enemy, either retaining one of their spears or using a sword...'

Again, hope this helps.

Phil Sidnell