The Evolution of Shock Cavalry - From Antiquity to the Middle Ages DOCUMENTARY
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 06. 2024
- Learn about the evolution of shock cavalry from antiquity before the use of saddles and stirrups! Check out The Great Courses Plus to learn about shock cavalry in the campaigns of Alexander the Great: ow.ly/osex30rvhjf
In this history documentary we explore the topic of ancient cavalry. The basic idea is that these units often get depicted in media as performing glorious massed charges headlong into the enemy ranks as seen in such scenes as the Charge of the Rohirrim from the Battle of Pelenor Fields. In reality this would have been a very dangerous situation for cavalrymen even under the best circumstances. But to make matters worse, riders from antiquity fought without the use of either saddles or stirrups. So how on earth did they manage to dominate the battlefield with these handicaps. Let's find out.
We begin by covering the history of cavalry with the first domestication of the horse and its introduction to warfare first as member of the baggage train and soon after as a part of chariot crews rather than as actual mounted forces. This was in large part due to the lack of riding experience and technology on behalf of the rider. Soon after the Bronze Age Collapse however cavalry began to rise to prominence across the armies of the Mediterranean. We speak about the various forms of equine practices which ranged from riding bareback into combat as with the Numidian Cavalry to the use of simple bridles and cloth seats as with Greek Cavalry and Persian Cavalry.
We then cover the techniques used by these cavalrymen to mount, ride, and fight. As a part of this discussion, we rely heavily on Xenophon's Manual on Horsemanship which provides excellent first hand details from the period. We also show how these techniques were successfully used by shock cavalry of antiquity such as the Macedonian Companion Cavalry, the Saka Steppe Lancers, and the Persian Cataphracts to great effect even without the use of saddles and stirrups.
Finally we do pose the question of why they didn't use the saddle and stirrup given its seemingly obvious advantages. To answer this question we look at the history of its development from late antiquity to the early Middle Ages.
Bibliography and Suggested Reading
On Horsemanship, by Xenophon
Adrian Goldsworthy, The Complete Roman Army
Adrian Goldsworthy, Roman Warfare
J.C. Coulston, Cavalry Equipment of the Roman Army in the First Century A.D.
George T. Dennis, Maurice's Strategikon, p. 38.
Julius Caesar, Commentarii de Bello Civili
Russel H. Beaty, Saddles
#History
#Documentary
#ShockCavalry
![Avenging Varus - The Germanic Wars [FULL DOCUMENTARY]](/img/n.gif)
I was inspired by comments on our latest Units of History episode covering the Companion Cavalry which asked about how shock tactics worked in an age before the stirrup and saddle. I went down the rabbit hole finding answers and present to you my findings in this video! One awesome source we used was the Manual on Horsemanship by Xenophon which you can read for yourself here: www.gutenberg.org/files/1176/1176-h/1176-h.htm
Great! I also got involved recently in some discussion on the importance of stirrup and high saddles, probably in SandRhoman's video on "the infantry revolution" but can't find it. It is a most important topic, especially as heavy cavalry (cataphracts) appear without apparently any stirrup to give them the extra push but still being quite effective since at least the battle of Carrhae (and much more clearly since the Sassanids).
This is a great video! I'm glad you made it. It is such an interesting topic. :D
@@LuisAldamiz No stirrup is necessary for a massed cavalry charge when you have mass on your side. Most cavalry formations when charging infantry adopted a wedge formation to punch a hole in the formation.
@@weirdofromhalo The Parthians, Romans, Sassanids, Han Empire, etc were known to have used specialized saddles (in some cases even tying the rider to the horse) for stability during a heavy cavalry lancer charge.
One interesting part of Xenophon's manual is the part where he urges the Greeks to adopt Persian style heavy cavalry.
"Xenophon watched as the Persian heavy cavalry charged in column formation and caused massive damage to the unprepared Greek horsemen....The Persian heavily armoured cavalrymen made such as impression upon Xenophon that in the years between 367 and 365 BC, he wrote two treatises, The Cavalry Commander and On Horsemanship, in which he advised the Greek heavy cavalrymen to not only attack in the column formation of their Persian counterparts, but also to adopt similar weaponry and heavy armour for both rider and mount." -Cataphracts Knights of the Ancient Eastern Empires by Erich B Anderson
Crazy how this guy went from making Total War commentaries to making high quality history docs.
Crazy, but isn't he in good company? A bunch of the history channels started as Total War-related channels.
DarkGhost89 And many others used or are using total war for thier history docs
Yeah I remember watching THFE back then, he was the one that got me into total war games.
If you consider most of his viewers are total war players , It is not so surprising .
Even before that he used to do Halo Reach custom games reviews
My Great Great Grandfather was in the 1st Royal Bavarian Chevau-légers. He brought back several trophies from the battlefields of Europe during WWI which we still have including a mummified severed ear. Family legend says he got it during the Battle of the Frontiers in 1914 after getting into a sword fight with a high ranking French soldier who's unit had shot his horse.
what a fucking legend
Dam he was savage
Was World War 1 the last time cavalry had an impact on the battlefield?
@@dylandoh6495 Sort of… It was the last time cavalry was deployed effectively in a major war. It should also be noted cavalry was made largely useless on the Western Front by trenches but the Eastern Front was too large to fortify and cavalry remained a legitimate force there.
However, cavalry did see limited use at the start of WW2 on the Eastern Front. It was used mostly as mobile infantrymen rather than shock cavalry, but afterwards it was replaced by motorized infantry.
Horses were also used in Afghanistan a couple of decades ago.
Basically, after WW1 cavalry became the poor man’s motorized infantry and cars have replaced horses wherever they were available and affordable.
The closest thing to shock cavalry today is a tank assault with mobile infantry riding in support.
@QualityPen That is an excellent answer.
I find your cavalier attitude on this deadly topic to be quite schocking.
Everything is hard until it is easy.
The couched lance was such a strange idea until it was normal, and then out-dated.
Well put!
Perhaps someday a trip to the moon will be as easy.
@@Inquisitor6321 I bet that you're right. It will probably be much easier and widely accessible in the futher.
Eventually outdated, but it had some amazing longevity for sure. Even in WW1, the eastern front was a frequent scene to light cavalry clashes between Russia and their opponents, Germany and Austria-Hungary.
It was due to technological advances behind it like stirrup or saddle that allowed that equipment to become normal. Tl dr, technology
It never occurred to me until now that they didn't have saddles and stirrups, but it makes perfect sense. I can't imagine riding a horse into combat without stirrups! That's horsemanship on a whole different level! Great video! Please keep the outstanding videos coming and God bless you, my friend!
idk, stirrips i know are usede for deep swipes and allow the rider to lean more outward of the saddle,
Great Stirrup Debate. Historians debate heavily over the stirrup, for a long while it was considered that only the stirrup allowed cavalry charges, but that has changed heavily in the last few decades. Stirrups increase left-right stability, but not the front-back stability to the level that is required to withstand and deliver a spear thrust in a charge. The Roman 4 horn saddle, and a the medieval high-back saddle serve to increase front-back stability.
But no matter the specifics of techniques or technology, being in and executing a cavalry charge is just such and weird and fascinating concept.
Have you ever ridden a horse?
It's really not that hard to maintain stability forward and back- even while hardly using the stirrups. It's side-to-side stability they really help with...
Love this stuff! American Indians did not use stirrups or saddles, as a rule. When I didn't have lots of time but wanted to work in a ride at 5 AM, I would ride bareback. It's actually easier to do! Of course, we weren't charging into battle!
I've always loved learning about lost early history. Just a month ago I was browsing through a unit of an old estate buyer and found an old book for $3. It turned out it was a horse care and riding manual from 1520 Germany. This thing has at least 1-2 thousand pages. Im extremely excited to have it translated as there no telling how much lost information on the subject can be recovered as the accumulated knowledge in the book will likely stretch back centuries.
That's amazing, any updates on the book?
What's interesting to note is that horses in the middle ages were a bit like cars today.
Most households could afford one, but it's not a flashy breed. A warhorse is going to cost something like 40 to 400 times as your horse for everyday travel, not to mention how much feed it required. These specialized breeds were only developed during what we typically think of as the middle ages, most horses before more the size of ponies, and thus made the conventional image of knight possible.
In the Middle Ages, it wasn't so much size, as musculature, and even depth perception: as horses were bred stronger, and with more intense training, they became more agile and better at shifting their weight.
Thanks, I didn't know that before.
What’s also interesting is that during the classical age, the cost of a slave was comparable to the cost of a car. Rich people had lots of them, having one was a sign of being at least middle class, and some less financially astute went into unsustainable debt just so they could buy one.
Oh, and like horses and cars some people bought slaves that simply looked flashy and had no practical use other than to ride.
@Somnus 0 Se-ecks :D
@Somnus 0 😏
4:52 goddamn that Achaemenid cavalryman looks badass. No wonder they were the most feared unit of the ancient world.
A few things that need to be noted. One being that we have no clue how the Roman four horned saddle was actually constructed. It can be seen on artworks (monuments of stone etc.) and we have finds of the leather covers of the saddle. But it is not at all clear whether it had a solid wooden tree or was actually constructed more like a pillow and filled with straw for example. Also it does sound interesting that it is being linked to Eurasian steppe while most scholars argue it was invented by the Celts.
I am kinda hung up on the part that shock cavalry did not charge right into formations. This probably was the case in antiquity but in the next video, if there will be a medieval version, as well as renaissance and beyond, it does have to be pointed out that they often successfully did.
The idea that you need a stirrup for using the lance in a couched position has by now been disproven quite a lot. There also is a bachelors thesis about it. In general fencing with spears/lances is a lot more fluid and less like Total War Medieval II (even though I love the game).
If you want to see mounted fencing check out Arne Koets' channel:
czcams.com/video/fdAR8BUpa6U/video.html
I mean to be fair the Romans and the later Persians did have really good saddles. Matter fact the Roman Saddles so good that there was a study done where a man joust with it with no Stirrup and I was able to joust just fine with the Roman for horn saddle.
Sure the Stirrup does help but it's not needed with the Roman four horned saddle.
@Kshitij Raj An easy shortcut would be to prevent the horse from seeing forward at all, and only see to the sides. It would be simple enough to teach a horse to trust the rider in that case, and historically this was also a thing.
Invicta did say Horses wont charge without extensive training: Which Destriers received in the Middle Ages. You folks need to LISTEN BETTER.
Im not sure you understand the difference between the Lance/Spear of Antiquity and the Spear/Lance of the Middle ages. The invention of stirrups and more importantly: the lance rest and frankly, the heavy heavy armor they wore allowed Middle age charging.
Shock cavalry rarely charged headfirst into infantry. However, it did occasionally happen, especially often with cataphracts. But of course, cavalry charged into infantry from the rear all the time.
@Kshitij Raj many medieval chanfrons cover the horses eyes to an extent which does impede vision therefore they see could end up seeing less.
One thing people tend to forget is that a horse has a HUGE field of vision. One pointy stick aimed at the horses front might simply not be noticed or ignored. There are innumerable videos on the internet where you can see horses that are not trained at all simply not caring one bit and just charging right into stuff. My favorite example is a video where two horses trot on a street and just run straight into an approaching car (and they did see it coming for a long time).
Head on charging infantry was done a lot. Sure you try to get them from the sides (why shouldn't you? It makes absolute sense) but we have dozens of examples where the cavalry just ploughed through the enemy lines and nobody really cared since it is the norm, rather then the exception. Cavalry getting stopped and beaten back is the exception, which is why there are so many sources about those battles. "Hey did you hear, XXX managed to stop and repel an YYY's cavalry charge at the battle of ZZZ."
While the other sources regarding the successful charges are more like "and then they charged and won."
Take Verneuil 1424 for example, the Italian cavalry just obliterates the English infantry at the beginning and then continuing further to the baggage train. When the Italian later come back to see how the battle went they found out that the English reformed and beat the French. But the Italians were rather happy, they got to plunder and only lost 16 men or something like that out of their 2000 guys that charged. And the sources are rather silent about them. They only care about the French being defeated. But the Italians did their job with near perfection.
The more you think about cavalry the crazier it gets. Like whoa, an animal riding another animal? That’s some fantasy shit right there.
How about we build a freaking tower on top of an animal, and fill it with other animals who hurl sticks at other animals with tension from animal intestines.
@@JasonKifner how about we get another animal, set it on fire and send that at the animal with the tower
I didn't know you're into that!
@@heroscapewarrior4217 That’s actual fantasy right there.
@@QualityPen That was actually a legit battle tactic against elephants
The one time I decide to pull an all-nighter to work on a report. I recieved a gem that'll help keep me awake, entertained, and informed. Thank you Invicta!
This video just screams "my balls!" throughout the ages and in so many different languages
this is the first thing to make me laugh since i heard my cat got hit by a car
thank you
The first stirrups were probably two balls that hung by the sides of the horse.
@@samwessels8216 Hold up?
Greatest comment in history
Of all the saddles I've ridden with, the Roman 4 horned saddle is my personal preference. While you may not have quite the same freedom of movement that stirrups can allow, I have never felt so secure on the back of a horse with any other saddle type. This was particularly nice when practicing javelin or archery.
The whole thing about no stirrups is incredible.
This is gonna be awesome!! Never been this early. Keep making garest content; I love your videos!!!
Glad to see we've got people out here in the late night shift (11:50 pm my time) : )
@@InvictaHistory please do 1 on the sikh empire please
I really hope you never stop making these videos, The imagery and the information is so interesting that I wish you continue. Greetings from Denmark
The Last time I was this early Silesia was still Austrian.
The last time I was this early Napoleon was admiring you at your grave
too soon :(
I appreciate how you mention how the horse won't simply throw itself into the enemy. It really does look comedic
except it actually will do that , a war horse to be more specific , this idea that a horse simply wont do it is mainly true for modern horses which are simply used for riding around and jumping while being cute at the same time , people werent dumb enough to ride skittish horses into battle , wouldnt be bad if modern horse owners realised that and stopped spreading rubbish all over the internet , i might add that a good example were the winged hussars which charged into pikemen headlong , often breaking them and other times failing
@@mcsmash4905 then by that logic, how did formations such as the Napoleonic Squares or Tercios work at all. Because by that definition, it like running small cars into a formation. This is also not taking into considering that the horse or the rider is insane or suicidal enough to preform that action in the first place.
@@steelydan3263 the fact that cavalry broke pike squares doesnt mean the square didnt work like what kind of logic is that? And dont forget that this is war if you are ordered to charge at a square you **will** do it and if not someone else will horses and humans are expendable , either way sometimes the pike broke sometimes it didnt it depended largely on the men forming it , veteran troops with nerves will hold , rookies will be scared shitless and will freeze in place or run away and on top of all that you have half dead horses falling on top of you and making a breach with their own bodies which is what happened when a british light cavalry unit did in persia during thr anglo persian war , they made a gap with their bodies and broke thr square apart , several VC's were won that day (ignore the typos)
You guys are incredible! Your content just keeps getting better and better!
Which software did you use to create this video?
CAN'T WAIT FOR PART 2! I LOVE CAVALRY
Awesome vid. As soon as I get a foothold economically you're the first creator I'm becoming a patron for.
Hype!!!!! Can’t wait to spend my time watching this!!!!
Always be down for "doing the greatest mischief to the enemy."
I remember reading about some early Assyrian or Babylonian cavalry that were essentially two guys riding on one horse, with one in front riding and the guy behind him shooting a bow. There were apparently also another type of horse archer where two horses were led a man riding one of the horses, with the archer sitting on the second horse and firing. Its kind of interesting how complicated firing a bow from horseback was at that point.
Splendid, thanks!
Great video. Also to note that the Irish didn't adopt the high saddle or stirrups until the 1600s. It was reported that they were still highly maneuverable and fought in similar ways done in antiquity. They didn't do full frontal charges but more flanking and routing. It was mention that they were easily unhorsed but they could simply hop back on again and keep going. They also were known to fight with an overarm grip rather than an couched position the English would use.
In Ireland into the Renaissance stirps weren't used as it was seen as unmanly , there horses were also Very small (.if demounted (which happened often) They would Just jump back up on the horse .an Englishman said there were no. Finer horseman on Christian ground, the problem they weren't very effective as soldiers
Pretty sure there were finer horsemen than Irish tribals in the Steppes or the Middle East
@@bobbyjoe1111 it was a quote and the Middle East and the steeps weren't Christian. The Irish weren't tribal
Can’t wait for the next episode of this, hopefully about the medieval evolution or even the steppes cultures!
A wonderfully informative video. It's great to know about this sort of thing. Nice job.
Nice video! Could be nice to see a video discussing the evolution of infantry combat from antiquity to the middle ages.
Murat: Charge!!
Napoleon: what the hell is that idiot doing?
Sorry for doing this, but I think you mean a scene at Waterloo. So it will be Ney and Napoleon. But the content is 100% correct.
@@alexm.h.8270 its not a waterloo reference, its a reference that Murat is not a bright tactician and Napoleon always tell him about his recklessness and to use his brain to think and not mindlessly chase or charge the enemy.
@@alexm.h.8270 No no, actually this is more befitting with him, like at the Battle of Eylau, most of daring cavalry charge was being led by him personally, even as far as Cossacks want to capture him alive in the midst of battle since the beginning of Russian campaign, heck he is even famous with the soldiers from various nation because of his bravery in combat. Well since he's the most easy to spot on the battlefield with those flamboyant suits and clothes he had wear all along the Napoleonic War. Meanwhile Ney become famous for his brave attempt to relink himself with the rest of Grand Armee at the Battle of Krasny. So in my opinion Murat is a more fitting choice.
Every Cossack wanting to capture him: OOORAAH! MURAAAT!
Earlier than the sea people
😂
That was a horrific sight to remember. ;-;
Crab people, crab people!
I love your uploads so much!
exaclty what i needed
Interesting and informative, thanks!
Yaaaay . love any thing this channel makes
Ah, the tanks of antiquity.
@@Crinjal_2611 Elephants would be more like the air strike equivalent but not that effective against infantry the second the time you use them.
Excellent video! Thank you very much.
☝️😎
Damn almost a mill subs. I swear i feel like not long ago it was less than 200k. Keep up the good work!❤️
really interesting video, thanks for the content
A great book about horsemanship in antiquity is “ Warhorse - cavalry in ancient warfare” by Phillip Sidnell.I fully recomend.
"maintaining this pose for long period of time takes years of practice and physical conditioning" and the conditioning kinda ruins you for other things. A rider has a narrowed hip joint, tilting the pelvis forward and rolling the thighs inward, this leads to pronation of the foot and hyper extension of the knees when standing legs together, with a exaggerated curve in the lower spine to compensate. Knock kneed and sway backed on land, when the legs are roughly horse width apart the knees face forward, the foot is flat, and the back is straight when relaxed. There is a reason most modern horse riders are also avid pilates/yoga/stretching fanatics. These soldiers would have had horrible daily pain when not in the saddle. It only gets worse without stirrups...
Awesome as always
Out here on the steppes we have smaller horses. So to mount the horse without stirrups we lean over the horseback, put our arms over the horse's back and then jump. As we leave the ground, we use our hands to pull us further up, while throwing our right foot over the horse and to the other side.
"We'll start with getting on a horse.. a process that's hard enough today."
**Laughs in Colorado**
Yeah, try getting on top of an unsaddled horse. Quite a bit more athletic than climbing a stirrup, isn't it.
@@talknight2 Modern horses are significantly larger than ancient ones, though. Iron Age horses were 12 hands tall, while anything shorter than 14.2 hands today is a pony. The average horse today is 15.2 hands and get as tall as 18 hands.
@@QualityPen People were also smaller back then too and maybe even more so than horses.
Another awesome video.
This was a really awesome video.
Excellent! Thanks
In the Far East in China, chariot-to-horse military usage follows a similar pattern during the Warring States era. The State of Zhao, for instance, fought the Xiongnu nomadic forces extensively, and therefore adopted horse archers extensively among their own forces. Other states still used heavy chariots in battle, and only in the late Han did the usage of the chariot phase out slowly.
The Jin Dynasty is often credited with the use of paired stirrups, and that era coincides quite well with an earlier development timeline of the stirrup from the steppes, further supporting their likely place of origin.
The chariot was fully replaced by the time of the Qin Dynasty, actually. The Qin also fought many horse riding peoples and embraced cavalry quite quickly.
@@weirdofromhalo Actually, we have accounts of the Han Dynasty using armored chariots against the Xiongnu at the battle of Mobei. It was after 133 BC when the Han Dynasty decided to finally phase out chariots, and even then they would see some usage. Cavalry had certainly become a dominant force by the late Warring States era, but the chariot's phase-out was gradual rather than a sudden shift. But the Qin, too, were extensively skilled horsemen, considering their supposed origins as horse-breeders for the Zhou, and their extensive battles against the nomads from further west.
@@brokensky2378 I believe those "chariots" are actually war wagons, used as mobile cover on the steppe. It's a similar tactic that's popped up all around the world where wagons were a common means of transport.
You guys make bananas specific videos. I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THEM
Last time I was this early the Winged Hussars just arrived!
Kislev
It’s crazy to me how long it took for the stirrup to be invented and spreaf. It seems like such a logical piece to have as part of a saddle, even a basic saddle.
Have you ever seen a Krieg cavalry charge
It is awe inspiring
Rough riders in 2nd edition work a little like infantry with a longer charge. I think they got their explosive lances later on, in here they got normal lances. Close combat weapons with a big initiative bonus on the charge.
Double the cost of an infantry squad though, even more expensive than stormtroopers (who to be fair are just BS 4 Ld 8 guardsmen with lasguns and flak).
Imagine a patchy sky with sun in greece, you get your horse and meet up with your friend and gallop and train with the javelin rest in the shade and just enjoy life. Certainly people back then had a sh*ty and brutal life but i do believe that would have been a good day to be alive.
@Wind Rose Actually, inequalities were really high. Meaning that the 5% to 10% top had ok to great living conditions (for that time) while 95% of the population were poor farmers.
Remember that a kid out of 3 died during his first year at the time though. Being adult means you're already lucky.
This brings up a good point, which is sometimes overshadowed by current view on the lives of the past. Human beings are adaptable and will try and find rewarding and enjoyable experiences with what they have regardless of other circumstances. Leisurely horsemanship would have been a perfectly common and even encouraged pastime for nomadic populations. Sedentary antique civilizations loved all kinds of different parties, festivals and holidays. The Greeks were massive fans of professional sports and even the poorest would have had access to communal sports (It's obvious, of course, that the representatives a city state would send to panhellenic Olympics would have been healthy, wealthy freemen, not some random slaves).
i expected to hear more about shock cavalry in the middle ages where i thought its height was. but the video just cuts off right there. feelsbadman
Yey! another video voiced by Oakley^^
Thank you 🙏 for this invicta
Your almost to a mill
Fun fact: he will never read this comment.
Rohan loves this video ;)
PLEASE!!! do the medieval part soon!
I’ve been riding horses my entire life just about, the bond between horse and man is just absolutely incredible. I like to imagine my proud Thoroughbred charging into battle, but I realize after researching the history or horses in warfare how truly skilled and hardy you and your horse had to be. Even with all my years of riding, there’s no way I could dream of doing these maneuvers bareback. Not to mention, my horse is 17.1, (which is very tall) and isn’t really ideal for warfare for that reason. You wanted something smaller, and agile, to accomplish this. Great video Invicta! Thank you so much!
The maneuvers and the suitable size of the horse varied with the intended role. 17.1 is indeed on the tall side for any role, but early renaissance heavy cavalry that delivered formed charges tended to use the largest and strongest horses available, as it was easier for them to maintain formation while in armor and being ridden by a soldier in armor. The late shock cavalry didn't need to be particularly agile for their role, especially as the infantry formations begun to transform into massive pike blocks that were positively glacial in movement and reaction ability.
The natural consequence of this specialized superheavy shock cavalry was, of course, the (re)introduction of light and intermediary cavalry that would be used against field cannons and other cavalry as well as targets of opportunity and out-of-battlefield harassment of the opponent and these groups would indeed have wanted smaller, nimbler steeds.
Nice video!! Can you make more total war videos?
You should do a video on the gallic/germnaic auxillary calvary the romans utilized so often! Great video!
I feel sorry for their bottoms, at the same time, their bottoms must be really cut.
Salut à toi vieil empereur.
Well thank you a lot for this video: this is a topic i recently got info, nice to have this video ad a starting point for further research.
In that regard, there are any sources you can suggest to a novice researcher?
👍 good video
Cool topic
Good clip :)
Would like to know more how Alexander's heavy cavalry fought. Did they charge to cover ground stab with their spears once or twice, then retreat, regroup, and charge again until the infantry broke? Did they charge one time to cover ground, and then fought as hoplites on horses? This is still unclear.
The Hetairoi and similiar Hellenistic heavy cavalry (Xystophoroi, Lonchophoroi, ect) used the Xyston, a 12ft lance that was held with two hands and at a slight downward angle. Kontos lance is the successor of this, which was primarily used by Kataphraktoi. Basically, they dealt with enemy cavalry first and then charged into the pinned down enemy infantry line with Xystons angled, per Hammer and Anvil. Atleast that's what the source material is telling us. Macedonian styled heavy cav changed the role of cavalry and made a distinction between normal, skirmish and heavy. Kataphraktoi are a further distinction, namely heavy shock cav. Their whole point being breaking up already engaged and damaged formations to cause a mass route. Usually the mere sight of them was enough already to cause a drop in cohesion. And it's all about cohesion in infantry combat.
Tnx
The Assyrians were well known for using shock cavalry and archer mounted horses
The Assyrians were known for using horses at all, while others used them only with chariots. But "shock cavalery" is kinda exagerated.
There is pictures showing 2 guys on the same horse's back. Charging without saddle is already hard enough with one guy, imagine with two.
perfect! i recall archeologists found human thigh bones very dense and strong from lots of riding like this.
Interesting 🤘
I think Khalid's mobile guard cavalry was heavily influenced by the Companion cavalry, both relied more on speed and shock rather than brute strength and armor, the only difference might've been the lack of formation with the mobile guard.
Early Muslim conquests feel a lot like the great Conquests of Alexander the Great or the expansion of the Roman Republic/Empire. .
@@zippyparakeet1074 They rely heavily on clever tactic and patience, not superweapons unlike those armies you mentioned. On paper, Roman Cataprachts and Persian Asawiran should be able to defeat them. Their archers were equipped with self bow, kind of inferior to their enemies composite bows. I honestly don't buy the idea that Persian and Romans were too exhausted because history is never that simple.
Their feats should be even harder to recreate in games. Perhaps there are so much we don't understand about historical warfare and the importance of morale.
Maybe armors are just facade, maybe some bedouin spearmen in loose formation could truly defeat tight bodies of Scutatoi and Cataprachts.
What was the second type of antiquity cavalry mentioned in the video? Besides the companions and cataphract
Indo -Europeans used the horse a cart for war before the Sumerians, and the stirrup was why the Huns and Mongol's dominated the known world.
Only huns. By 13th century when Mongols arrived stirrup was known for centuries in western Eurasia.
i would love to see a presentation how cavarly charge looked like into an infantry formation, why diamond formation was good etc
neat stuff
Will you make a video talking about the evolution of the use of the spear / pike / Bayonet
Last time I was this early, it was Bronze Orientation Day for stone artisans
For next units of history do the Winged Hussars.
Notes: light cavalry used as scouts, transport or skirmishes to sofen up the enemy, sometimes these light hourse could be turned into a full charge helping the infantry but could esaly be detured by string walls of long spears or large amounts of archer,
But these light skermishers will out last in stamina, so can skermish multiple times to bate an enemy into a trap... Tiering them out too
So heavy cavalry used as tanks could more reliably conduct these charges of flanks, or if the enemy breaks and roughts can be hunted down but these heavy units will get tired exspecaly in hoter climets meaning cannot retreat or defend themselves
Later the winged husars used longer lances and heavy armour to counter pikes making infantry break before the horse reach the spears but were counterd when the guns incred in power and range, and longer spears were put in the ground..
I definitely want to try out a four horn saddle. I’ve been riding horses all my life, and I want to see how that would be
I had never thought about them having to have their legs loose or they might break, scary stuff
Besides the "Evolution of Shock Cavalry", any chance you'll also cover what led to shock cavalry's decline or allowed the infantry to level the playing field again shock cavalry units or charges?
The “slipping and flipping” appears as a visual gag in Mulan 2!
Oh right comments to show my liking :)
I absolutely love this channel and I have only one gripe, I don't mind you getting paid for a promo at all but, I pay for CZcams premium so I don't get force fed advertisements. It's a shame they're in every episode regardless. That being said I'm not asking you to change anything on your program, just wish the adverts were only in non premium like we pay for.
Maybe video about battles when horse cavalry faced camel cavalary?
This makes me wonder how armies that were pure cavalry or close to being such (steppe peoples, Parthians, etc.) functioned.
In this example, and many many similar to this, the cavalry relies on the infantry to do it's part of the work. That makes me wonder how the aformentioned armies adapted.
Nomadic armies must be understood as more holistically strategic entities than the infantry-based sedentary armies. The importance of a pitched battle, or the threat of such, is much less of a point with a cavalry army. Instead, skirmishing, controlling the general area and raiding is the name of the game with their usage. The point would be to relentlessly harass infantry-based armies on the march where they are vulnerable to sudden attacks and unable to respond quickly and prevent efficient foraging by keeping constant contact with the foraging parties and killing off any such group that's unable to protect itself. The idea was to essentially keep any stationary army under soft siege and attrition any marching army. Against each other, cavalry armies would have largely done the same and a large, pitched battle, would have been more an accident or an exploitation of sudden opportunity than an actual goal.
If you look at Parthian-Roman conflicts, this is exactly what they did and in both Anthony's and Crassus's case, the Romans ultimately couldn't deal with the inability to forage and the inability to fend off the Parthian forces, while the Parthians were hard-pressed to crack the Roman fortifications and couldn't pursue Romans to the Armenian mountains that the Romans used as a refuge in Anthony's retreat. In Crassus's case, the pitched battle saw extensive use of horse archers with the Parthian forces replenishing their arrows on the go, with the core of cataphracts being used to give short, focused strikes against the parts of Roman forces that were especially badly affected by the constant arrow fire.
The weaknesses would be dealing with especially difficult terrain, such as mountains, or dealing with long, stationary conflicts such as sieges as the mobility of the cavalry couldn't be properly utilized in the first case and in the second, the cavalry would eat through the fodder quickly and exhaust the nearby grazing grounds too, which would force the army to abandon siege.
Can you do a video on why the romans started just using the sword in late republic and why they later dropped its sole use again in the later empire
When is Caesar Part 3 coming out????
I don't need sleep, I need to watch this Video (For my time zone is 2:14 am)
Invicta it's midnight on a Sunday and I was about to sleep. Why do you do this to me
Because no expects the Spanish Inquisition.
Sir,which is the next video on encient military units
Feel like someone watched a Lindybeige vid and did some homework. Nice. 🤗
3.47 what culture's depicted here?? That looks amazing
As a long term horse rider, I really struggle to understand why it took so long to develop the stirrup.
It's not only safer but also enable you to ride for much longer because, at the normal speed, you can stand up and sit down again in the rhythm of the horse
That is not only more comfortable but also decreases the stress on the horses back, enabling it to run longer
Because you don't need them. If you have a smaller horse they are usually easier to sit. When traveling you go in walk all the time and let your horse rest as much as possible. Xenophon even writes about it that half of your troops should always be dismounted and the other half mounted and then they switch so you can also let some horses rest while the others are mounted so you can defend yourself from an enemy attack. If you go faster than walk you loose cohesion. Rising trot, light seat and all that stuff only came about in the last two hundred years. Before that even with stirrups people would always stay seated. Where it does not make a difference whether you have a stirrup or not. The only big advantage from a riders perspective is that it keeps you upper leg at a steadier position making it easier to ride from your thighs. Something you need for the high school stuff we see in the high middle ages and later on.
So basically Calvary was the cars of war. They go out-kite their enemies and continually hit them with artillery, but any close-up engagements got messy for them.