Roman Heavy Cavalry Fighting Techniques

[Paullus Scipio]

Robert/Vortigern studies wrote:-

In this case yes, but they of course had other (mobile) roles, such as (as Paul already wrote) when charging, harrying a broken enemy, or as horse archers. In fact they were far more versatile than just 'spear infantry'.

Well, the post was getting kind of long, without considering these roles, but Robert is entirely right.

Cataphract/Clibanarii cavalry had many roles beyond 'just' frontal confrontation. In the face of a 'close order/heavy' infantry line, enemy 'infantry spearmen' had little alternative to a head-on clash, but cavalry, being more mobile, could work their way around a flank. Equally, against nomad horse archers ( a common Late-Roman foe), an infantry line could do little but stand and endure, whereas ( at least in theory!) by virtue of their long lance and armour, the cataphracts could drive off this 'lesser gentry', or by virtue of their bows, inflict the same long-distance damage on the enemy.

The 'down side' was that these 'super-heavy/all purpose' cavalry were incredibly expensive to raise and train, and often proved to be "jack-of-all-trades, master of none" in practise, being insufficiently numerous to beat nomad cavalry, and often too cumbersome to succeed as 'heavy cavalry' fighting at close quarters, as the Emperor Julian would be the first to testify ! ( Belisarius would have better luck in different circumstances, though his Hunnic cavalry seem to have been his 'Ace' rather than 'cataphracts' )